The Lyttelton Times. THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 1893.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXX, Issue 10112, 10 August 1893, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 1893.

When the acts of public men point ; one way, and their language another, it is safer to place reliance upon their deeds than upon their words. From the time Sir Julius Yogel left New Zealand in 1876—with the exception of the two years during which the Ministry of Sir George Grey held -office—until 1884, the Conservatives governed the Colony. No matter who was Premier, Sir Harry Atkinson, Sir John Hall or Sir Frederick "Whitaker, it was always the same Government. During seven years it was the same policy of , borrowing and spending, and in all : other respects letting things remain as they were. The Continuous Ministry held power upon strict party principles. It fought every election upon party grounds, it seduced members from the following of Sir George Grey upon party lines, l and for the whole of the long period in which the Government was in its hands it presented a solid and united party to the country. When } at length, a change came and jth© Conservatives found themselves in opposition, they discovered that party government was a very bad thing. Hesitatingly at first they announced the new light that had dawned upon them; then, becoming more assured in the strength of their convictions, they denounced party government ’ as an unmitigated evil, and finally they came to regard it as the one political abomination of the age, which all good patriots should sedulously labour to remove. When the Conservatives came to power again in 1887 all the mock heroics about the evils of party government were forgotten. The right party waa in office, and there could bo no improvement upon its methods. But the election of 1890 brought another change, and the cruel evils of party government have ever sines pressed hard upon the Conservatives. They have wept loud apd bitterly. If it were only “ possible to induce the electors of the Colony to look at things free from party bias ” a very different state of things would prevail. Then the old Do-nothings would come hack to power, and the evils of party government would he again forgotten. It will be remembered that Sir John Hail opened his address at Leeston with a strong denunciation of government by party; but before he resumed his seat he had delivered a speech in which every sentence reeked with party spirit. The Conservatives and their organs think the people will forget their deeds and trust implicitly to their words; but this is only another of their mistakes, and, happily it is not for the country a very serious one. Their object, of course, is to divide the Liberal ranks, and it is within the bounds of possibility that in 1893 some few electors may be caught by this shallow device as they wore caught in 1837. But if there is a shadow of a shade of sincerity in this impeachment of party government, why is not some plan put forward by which the alleged evils may be removed ? A suggestion has emanated from some irresponsible quarter that Ministers of the Crown should be selected by ballot of the members of the House of Representatives without regard to political principles and divisions. This ia the only idea that has been breathed to the public in the way of a remedy for the evils of party government. Dare the Conservatives adopt this suggestion as part of their policy and submit it to the electors at the nest general election ? If they are not prepared to go as far as that—to nail their colours to the mast and abide by the result—their innuendos and denunciations must be counted as the vapourings of office - cookers, the veriest red herrings that were ever trailed across a political scent. The truth is that under no form of representative government the world has yet seen has it beenfound possible to eliminate the element of party. Parties existed in the Republic of Rome; they are to ho found in the Republic of France, in the Republic of America, and in all the popular assemblies of the world. And if it were possible to obliterate the two great parties in a State—parties which are representative of human nature as well as of political principles—what would be tbe result? Instead of two would l® a ß|

half-a-dozen small cliques, factious and cabals intriguing and conspiring against each other over every trumpery matter until the whole tone of the representative institution became debased. If there are evils arising from party government, it is better a hundred, times to bear them with patience than to fly to the adoption of the untried theories of baffled and scheming politicians.