SIR JOSEPH WARD IN REPLY.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXVI, Issue 16922, 30 July 1915, Page 6

SIR JOSEPH WARD IN REPLY.

The letter in which Sir Joseph Ward replies to Mr Massey'a criticism of the Opposition over the failure of the recent negotiations has a genuine ring of sincerity and patriotism and serves to correct some hasty conclusions formed' by certain Reform journals. Probably the most important paragraph is that in which the Liberal leader discusses the nature of one of the proposals that was discussed. Mr Massey says that a certain basis was suggested by Sir Joseph Ward and agreed to, but was subsequently withdrawn by the leader of the Opposition. Sir Joseph Ward's recollection of tho matter is very different, for he says the proposal came from Mr Massey and wfts declined after Sir Joseph had consulted-representative members of his party- Another among many effective points made by Sir Joseph Ward is that there was no more reason to assume that a section of the Opposition would oppose a National Ministry than there was to assume similar hostility on the part of a section of the Reform Party. Tins is quite fair and perfectly. true, for anybody in receipt of reliable information is 'aware that several of Mr Massey's followers looked'upon the admission of Liberals into the Cabinet with an exceedingly unfriendly eye. The reply to tho proposal that tho portfolios of Defence and Finance should bo retained by Reform members of a National Cabinet appears to us to be finanswerable. Mr Massey's argument that the portfolio of Railway*! has a higher status, because it carried a higher salary, than that of Finance is almost too fallacious to be taken seriously. It is completely met' by the facts that Mr Allen has always been regarded as next in rank to Mr Massey and ia so -placed in official documents, that, Defence and Finance are war departments, and that tho war is the reason why a non-party Government is desired. We do not suppose that Mr Massey wished to infer that the question of salary would influence tho Opposition, but mention of this point makes it appropriate to say that throughout the negotiations there are no evidences of Oppositionists seeking office for. the sake of office or salary. What the Oppositionists have perluxps been over-sensitivo about is the retention of their identity as a party, and while that desir© can bo appreciated we feel that it ought to have been subordinated on all sides* to tho necessity of the time. Sir Joseph Ward is certainly entitled to 1 hope that the public will carefully consider the reasons that prevented the Opposition accepting any of Mr Massey's proposals, and in considering them homestfly the "people will, wo believe, realise that Sir Joseph and his friends were inspired by conscientious motives.