The New Zealand Times. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1913. THE NEW ORDER

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8329, 15 January 1913, Page 6

The New Zealand Times. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1913. THE NEW ORDER

It would be useless for anyone to attempt to argue that things were satisfactory to the Civil Service as a whole under the former political regime. At the same time, it would he quite absurd to pretend that these conditions have improved for the better since the Massey Government came into power. In certain notable instances consideration has been given to the claims of the individual, - with the result that the person benefited and his or her particular friends are loudly acclaiming the superior morality of the Tory administration. These individual examples are, however, few and far between. There are other cases, some of them presenting strong claims to consideration, that have been overlooked. It would be interesting to know why this distinction has been made. No doubt the answer to our inquiry will be that every individual grievance will be considered on its merits when the Public Service Commission comes into operation. Precisely so. And, that being so, it is amazing that on the eve of the initiation of a new system that was guaranteed by the self-styled political purists to put an end, to the alleged system of corruption there has been much activity in the service in the distribution of rewards and favours to a certain privileged few 1 . Why have these few been singled out for distinction now ? Were their deserts so scant that they did not dare to wait until the Civil Service Commissioners took control? It is the old story over again. Scarcely has the Massey party, in opposition, concluded its accusations of favouritism in the public service before the Massey party, in power, has begun to perpetrate flagrant acts of favouritism and partiality of which any decent administration would be ashamed. Two years ago, the men responsible for these acts would have classed them, if they had been performed by their opponents, under the heading of spoils to the victors. Now that the party of superior morality is in power, and is not ashamed of its performances, it would be charitable to describe the preferences its administrators have shown as long-delayed recognitions of merit. This concession will probably prove soothing to the admirers of the Tory Government, hut, on the other, hand, it will scarcely satisfy the large number of _ deserving officers •in the Civil Service who were entitled to equal consideration and who have been left to take their chance before the Commissioners, with no right to a voice on their own behalf, and with the knowledge in their minds that they are at the mercy of a “ confidential report” from a superior officer whom they may have chanced to displease. The case as we have put it is no mere figment of the imagination. It is not by any means overdrawn. Within the last few weeks one of the most responsible post tions in the public service, on which the attention of many people in Wei. lington is concentrated, was filled by the promotion of two junior officers of high standing over the_ head of a highly capable senibr official who was entitled by length of service and exceptional ability to the vacancy. It may be that means have been found to placate the wronged officer, and to reconcile him to a situation of injustice, but the fact remains that the gentlemen who are in power to-day and who lay vehement claim to superior morality are just as guilty of the flagrant acts of unfairness as was any politician in power who preceded, them. We have furnished one illustration of our argument which has happened in high places. Scores of examples might be given of other instances of favouritism that have been going on in subordinate and more obscure places. Shall we suggest the moral? It is so plain that ho who runs may read.