CHURCHILL AS MINISTER.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXI, Issue 18862, 10 November 1924, Page 7

CHURCHILL AS MINISTER.

STORM OF CRITICISM.

SIR R. HORNE'S EXCLUSION. LABOUR PORTFOLIO REFUSED. By Teleirraph—Press Association— Copyright (Received 5.5 p.m.) Eeuter. LONDON. Nov. 7. Mr. Winston Churchill's appointment as Chancellor of the Exchequer has created a sensation in political circles. It took the public by surprise, also. Notwithstanding the fact of Mr. Aus-ien Chamberlain's appointment as deputy-Leader of the House of Commons, the Chancellor's proximity to the Prime Minister has badly impressed the "die-hard" Conservatives. Sir Robert Home, who was formerly Chancellor of the Exchequer, is said to have declined office in the new Cabinet, owing to the binding character of his city connections. Conservative and Liberal newspapers generally commend Mr. Stanley Baldwin's choice of Ministers. Such criticism as does find expression centres upon Mr. Churchill's appointment and Sir Robert Home's exclusion. Concerning the latter the political correspondent of the Daily Telegraph says: "Mr. Baldwin at the first interview asked Sir Robert Home to accept the Labour portfolio. Sir Robert would have been prepared to make severe personal sacrifices in order to return to office as Chancellor of the Exchequer, but felt unable to accept the portfolio of Labour, which was the department in which he began his Ministerial career. No Room for Reactionaries. "Sir Robert yesterday had two further interviews with Mr. Baldwin, when it was urged that the Labour portfolio was of the greatest importance at present, though the salary was only £2000 a year. Sir Robert said he was unable to reconsider his decision. The portfolio of Labour was the only post offered to Sir Robert from first to last." In a leading article the Telegraph characterises Mr. Churchill's appointment as "very courageous," not because of any doubt of his adequacy for the post, but because it was notorious that he was not equally acceptable to all sections of Mr. Baldwin's supporters. The national finances, which were gravely embarrassed by Mr. Philip Snowden's reckless Budget, as the country would soon discover, called for a first-class Chancellor. The paper .expressed the hope that Mr. Churchill will rise to the full measure of the country's needs. It adds that the new Administration promises to be strong, capable and progressive. There could be no room for reactionary Toryism in a Cabinet which included two Chamberlains, a Birkenhead, and a Churchill. Ardent Colleagues Offended. The Times says that Mr. Baldwin resisted the temptation to surround himself with colleagues whose personal loyalty was their main recommendation. Ho had offended numbers of ardent members of his party who would have preferred to see Mr. Churchill win fresh spurs as a Conservative before entering the Cabinet. It was a bold, wise course, indicating that Mr. Baldwin did not fear intrigues, to give portfolios to associates other than those whoso chief political ambition was tc see the end of his leadership. The Morning Post expresses the opinion that good predominates in Mr. choice. This was certainly not the case in the late Government or in the Coalition Ministry.

It is stated on good authority that Mr. Baldwin consulted no one about Mr. Churchill's appointment.

The Post, in commenting on this, says: "If we do hesitate to applaud the bold experiment, it is not because Mr. Churchill has not yet declared himself a Conservative; nor is it based on Mr. Churchill's record, over -which we are quite willing to pass the sponge. It is because, rightly or wrongly, Mr. Churchill is regarded with hostility by the working classes, especially ex-service men. We fear this sentiment will make the co-operation we saould desire to see between all classes much more difficult than if Mr. Baldwin had undertaken it without the assistance of this new coruscating colleague."

"A Miracle of Clumsiness."

The Daily Chronicle says: "Mr. Churchill's appointment shows that Mr. Baldwin is standing up to the Tory 'diehards.' It also gives assurance that Free Trade will remain, even if small preferences to the Dominions are revived." The paper expresses the opinion that if the Indian situation develops Earl Birkenhead's guidance will not be nerveless.

The Daily Express says: "The new Cabinet was born in a blizzard, which may severely test its infantile stamina. Mr. Churchill's appointment is beyond criticism, so far as his abilities are concerned, but as a deliberate stroke of party strategy it is inexplicable. He fought shoulder to shoulder with the party which was determined to destroy the preference resolutions. It will be his first duty as Chancellor to defend them." Regarding Sir Robert Home, the Express says: "The double blunder of'omitting the offer of the portfolio of Chancellor of the Exchequer to Sir Robert, and the barren offer to him of the Labour portfolio, beggars comment, but the Home disaster is crowned and capped by the Derby disaster. It is a rmr*ele of clumsiness to eliminate the leaders of Scottish and Lancashire Toryism." Churchill's Anti-Socialism. The Graphic says: "Mr. Baldwin offered Sir Robert Home £6000 a year if he would accept the Labour portfolio, but Sir Robert demandtd the Exchequer or nothing." The Daily Mail says: "The inclusion of Mr. Churchill in the Cabinet is the greatest, most welcome surprise. It shows Mr. Baldwin iis anxious for complete Conservative reunion and to make the fullest use of the talent oi ; Mr. Churchill. The latter is the most effective critic of Socialism, and has long abandoned the use of pedantry and Cobdenism." The Labour paper, the Daily Herald, in commenting on the Evening Standard's description of Sir Robert Home's exclusion from khe Cabinet as a bad start, says: "This immediate outbreak of squabbling is a good omen. It shows the Tory majority will easily go to pieces if it bo unceasingly and scfcntifically attacked. Labour must plan a campaign carefully."

Regarding the Cabinet an a whole, it is pointed out that it contains few peers, and that Lords Cecil, Peel and Novar are omitted. Some surprise is expressed at Sir Arthur Steel Maitland's appointment as Minister for Labour, in view of Mr Baldwin's insistence to Sir Robert Horn© of its paramount importance.