The Oamaru Mail. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1910.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 10628, 3 December 1910, Page 3

The Oamaru Mail. SATURDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1910.

Tun whole story evidences a tactical

1.. blunder of the most The Last Of colossal proportions on Hina and Go. the part, of lln> Opposition, and a phenomenal: success for the party of the Government. From first to last the Government have scored. Their action lias 'forced, the enemy into attempting to prove that this Government and its predecessor were ever guilty oi corruption in any sense whatever. Had the Opposition been reasonable, the firmness of the Government in insisting on decent information before agreeing to any inquiry would have induced them to advise their neophyte to Formulate the charges as against particular members of the Legislature and no one else. But they were not reasonable, and they elected to force Mr Hine to make the Tammany charges, and all they could do i'or him when the charges broke down qua Tammany, was to make a new definition of Tammany, which, of course, did not fit the case, and so proclaim their success. Imagine a burglar convicted and appealing on the ground that as he defines the crime, burglary, being the highest form of altruism seeking to relieve otir neighbor of bis burdens, is worthy not of punishment, but reward. Does anyone dare to say that such a defence is a sufficient answer to a conviction? In the same way the Opposition attempted to get out of the charge of Tammanyism by declaring Tammanyism to bo for the moment something which it is not. Such tactics, of course, could not induce the House to send the report back to the Committee. The Committee was the authority set up to deal with this matter, and had dealt with it in the most open, comjjlete, and irreproachable manner. It- comprised among its members four of the Opposition, including its loader and its first officer. The utmost latitude had been allowed From first to last of the proceedings. No attempt at technicality marked the proceedings from tho beginning to the end of the long, laborious investigation. It was the very authority that the whole world would accept as impartial and likely to do its duty safely and. well. lint the Opposition refused to accept, and appealed to tho House to re-try the case on the old ground. Of course the result- was a crushing defeat. Once more has the Opposition been brought to the ground by force of its own blundering tactics. The treatment of Heuare Kaihau was just the thing for the case. The Maori member has been admonished by the House that lie has transgressed" the unwritten law. How it is possible for the immediate, descendant of savages who sixty years ago could not write to understand the niceties of unwritten laws is a thing which may be understood in the Legislature, though to" the outsider it is, we confess, a sealed book. However, the Maori managed to ask a very pertinent question, viz: why he could not receive a few pence, when the Leader of the Opposition, cotiid receive thousands from the same source —namely, his constituents. To have expelled the Muori member from the House would have been gross injustice and most inexpedient. lor, as a rule, expelled members come back stronger than ever. But it is not a question ot the degree of the punishment. It is a. question of whether there'shoukl be punishment at all. The Maori member undoubtedly offended against propriety, and lie has been warned not to offend again. The savage was entitled -to the benefit of probation i'or the first offence over placed on record. That be has got it is to the credit of the House. AVhen the addition to the Disqualification Act recommended by the Committee is added to it the whole case will be on a right footing. ,