THE CRISIS ON THE TARIFF

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14002, 7 September 1907, Page 10

THE CRISIS ON THE TARIFF

COMMENTS BY THE MINISTERIAL JOURNAL. THE PRIME MINISTER MAKES A STATEMENT. EXPLANATIONS ,BY MEMBERS CONCERNED. (From Oob Own Coemspondixt.) All the talk in political circles is still about the crisis over the tariff and the subsequent and oven more extraordinary and interesting oven more extraordinary and interesting developments. Indeed, the events : of the last-few days are-probably unique on the parliamentary history ot •' tile colony. Whatever may be; said • to/the contrary, they began by a movement in which- certain members of the Government party and the Opposition representing constituencies in tho m'ning and dairying districts conspired to do awaj- with the duty oh mining and' dairying machinery. The result was the defeat of the Government'on one of its tariff proposals on Wednesday night. The proceedings ended dramatically by a vehement denunciation by the Prime Minister and the temporary .abari-. dnnment of the Tariff Bill. This sudden and unexpected development caused somewhat of a political sensation, and there, was much .inoculation as to what would follow. There wero hints of a dissolution,, and some colour was. given to such a line of action by the appearanco yesterday of an unexpected bill dealing with t-Jie taking of licensing polls. The older parliamentary hands, however, came to the conclusion that the Government was,only bluffing, and that was the view put' forward in my telegrams on 'Wednesday and Thursday. The l'rimc Minister adopted a stand-oif policy, leaving '.ho. rebels to their own devices. in the hope, no doubt, that they would come to heel. No caucus was called; they were absolutely ignored, and their, fellow-members said they ..were feeling somewhat, miserable. {;- AN EXTRAORDINARY ARTICLE. This morning fuol was added to the. flames in tho shape of 'an extraordinary articlo in the leading columns of the Ministerial morning journal condemnatory of the Government members who had reversed their votes, of Mr Horries, and even of the Hon. tho Speaker himself,' Not only that, but the Times gave a black letter list (.in special type) of tho names of those who revorscd their vote given in Committee of Ways and Means, and also of those members of the Government party who, being in the prccint6, did not- record' their votes on Wednesday night—viz., Messrs Flatman, Graham, and Hogan. Such an unusually severe condemnation of Government supporters in the columns of a Government newspaper was almost unique in Now Zeuland journalism, and very naturally under the circumstances it was thought to bo inspired. The article, which is entitled " Questionable Conduct," begins with a surmise that there is more than- meets tho eye in the introduction of the Licensing Polls Bill, and after a brief explanation of the measure it proceeds to "It's introduction at this particular juncture has an ominous significance, none, the ' l*? 3 . marked because of the dignified silence hitherto observed by the head of tho Government on tho incident of Wednesday nignt, -which reflects so much discredit on certaui members who 'had so far professed, loyalty to the Government. Nothing during the present session had politically given us greater satisfaction than tho attitude of ; tho Premier on' an occasion which was calculated to ruffle even a. temper so well held jr. hand as that of Sir Joseph Ward. Wo consider that the Prcmior would have been wanting io his ' own dignity and to tho dignity and responsibility of his office if ho had not administered a stern rebuke to the traitors of his own camp. To say that he had not his temper in perfect control is not true. So far was he from lacking in proper deliberation that he allowed a considerable interval to elapse before lie characterised in language ecrkiinly not too strong a piece of parly treachery which was vile locked at from any one of its several sides." .Referring io those members of the Governmen* party who reversed their voto. tho' article proceeds: "Not merely did ithedo member individually go back on their vote given in Committee of Ways and Means, but f.hey carried on behind tho' Premier s back a propaganda, of persua?ion and seduction, the only object of which can have been and was" to put. a.n affront on the political chief to whom they owed at least tho loyalty of ordinary honesty. But even this babbling and. ill-' triguing, despicable as it is in itself, dees 'not measure t tho full amount of the treachery. Not content with inciting each ol3ier to take their ohief on Tlio flank when he least, oxpocted it, when they j bad, in effect, lulled his suspicions to rest by their vote in Committee of Ways and Means, some of the members cej'tawily went, so far 06 to intrigue arid join forces with the Opposition, and with which member of tho Opposition in particular? Well, wo are rather ashamed to answer this question, but, as a matter of fact, it was \Wth that particular member of the Opposition who a few nights before had insulted their ohief over a pardonahlo mistake made by him and readily acknowledged, in a. way that one gentloman does I not usually insult anothor under any provoj cation whatsoever. Wc are quite sure that, Mr Herries regrets tho words he usod of ■ Sir Joseph Ward on the occasion wo refer to, words which, coming from him, filled those who knew him with astonishment, Nevertheless he did use them, and ho used thom in the presence, of those very supporters of the Government who "a few days later entered into o. compact .with the member for the' Bay of Plenty to administer a blow to their chief, a blow which, as far as they were oonccrned, was a blow below tho bolt of the most treacherous kind. These mcnibors who covorcd themselves with glory by voting for tho Government in Committee of Ways and- Means, and without hint or yarning voting against tlio Government a weok later, deserve to have' thoir namos handed down to posterity, and as for as our ophcmcral efforts can do it tho thing shall be done. They were Messrs, Dillon, FHd, Hall, Horasby, Jennings, and Ross. What opinion do these gentlemen Biipposo will be entertained of thom by those members of the Opposition to whom thoy lent themselves out so readily w catspaws? Pretty much tho same opinion, wo should suppose, as that hold by the Government, a. fooling of supreme contempt. But' those six m'ojnben had at least a certain courage. That wc will say for them. It requires some eourago to exccuto in full face of Parliament a volte fuoo such, as theirs, and this eourago fliey possessed. In effect, beneath this lowest, • deep tliero is jsot a lower deep. , Tln-ee membeis—Messrs Flatman. Graham, and Hogan —by discreetly absenting themselves when the division look place', avoided the difficulty and danger of the acrobatic performaaco so nimbly executed by tho other gentlemen of their kidney, upon which commendable discretion there has l>ecn much interesting comment in the lobbies. As regards' the_ attitude of the Speaker on this interesting -occasion, we speak with some diffidence. No one would venture to throw any doubt on the impartiality of the present Speaker, but wc must be allowed to say that a Speaker who finds himself on the floor of tho House and nngagos in activo lobbying placcs himself in what we cannot help regarding as a false and extremely undesirable position, *A Speaker, according to our way of thinking, occupios a. position as strictly .judicial as that of a. judge of tho Supreme Court, and thus departs from it at his psril. He is supposed to hold the political balancc evenly between the two parties, and how can he do this if ho is a partisan for this or that measure? Even a Speaker cannot divest himself of political opinions. This it would bo unreasonable to expcot, but, at least, •his political opinions ought never to appear in evidence. This has long been the tradition of tho House of Commons, and it is also tlio principle acted upon at Washington. To come nearer home, the present Speaker's distinguished predecessor, Sir Maurice O'Rorke, observod the strictest neutrality in politics. So also did Sir W. Steward. We do not sur.'pose 'that Sir Joseph Wgvd is much disturbed by the late untoward incident. Cbrtainly lie lias, no need to be. From a point, of view of the Government the incident has at least this great advantage: that it- has unmasked the untrustworthy among thoir friends. ' If these members do not recogniso their obligations to tho Government, if they consider that they were returned under pledge to . support a man and not a Liberal policy, tho sooner thev aro afforded an opportunity of consulting thoir constituencies again'the 1 tetter. Sir Joseph Ward lias no need to fea,r an appeal to tho country. Wc are not prepared to 6ay as much for the members wlro hive so recently distinguished themselves, and vrlio have .vet to learn the merest elements of party loyalty. The : .fact is that these gentlemen have made a mistake which is apt to be made by shallow' haturcs. Sir Josoph Ward's conduct during his period' of offioo lias been very markedly characterised by. a certain moderation and urbanitv vvJiich arc tlio natural outcome of J. .k'Kfc Ms! courteous nature.'

lengths to which those members whose conduct wo have been discussing have permitted thomsclvw .to go'ive should saj iliat they have grievously misinterpreted tjiese traits in Sir Joseph's dimeter."