Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, TUESDAY, MAY 6, 1924. AUTHORITY AND RULE : PUTTING FIRST THINGS FIRST.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume L, Issue 16423, 6 May 1924, Page 4

Poverty Bay Herald. PUBLISHED EVERY EVENING. GISBORNE, TUESDAY, MAY 6, 1924. AUTHORITY AND RULE : PUTTING FIRST THINGS FIRST.

We have been reminded that Edmund Burke, speaking in the House of Commons, nearly one hundred and fifty years ago, on “Conciliation with America,” said : “Magnanimity in polities is not seldom the truest wisdom and a. great Empire and little minds go ill together.” Great Britain lost America by putting first, what appeared upon the surface of the politics of the clay do be the interests of the Mot heir land. South Africa was nearly lost t» the British Commonwealth. of to-day by the obtrusion of the same doctrine. Possibly, in both the cases of America and Africa., the pride of domination came in to cloud wiser eounr

sels. The; position in India to-day is rather serious. The same problem arises. Have the interests of t lie educated peoples of India been put, first? What- is best for India? Will tlie Motherland put that consideration first in dealing with the demand which has arisen for Indian home rule,? The National Council of the Independent. Labor party have encouraged the Indian Swarajists in their demand for a round table conference for the consideration of a revision of the present constitution, which, so far, has, had but a very short trial, and which those who are dissatisfied,, havo refused to work with. So far, Lord Oliver seems to have steered a sate course. He will not have satisfied the Labor Council. No one can question the right of India, to home rule when her greater inter-racial population is fitted for it. Great Britain has educated India. She has to face the result. The final settlement will take all the counsel that, thejnost experienced of those who have special knowledge of India and her problems can give. The question always is: What, is best, in the interests of the people governed? To put down a considered demand for home .rule, by the people of India as a whole, or fairly representative of the whole, by aimed force, is unthinkable. To educate them to the point of recognition that the best assurance of liberty, for all tribes and castes, is the intermediate over-rule of the Imperial Government, is as delicate as it is difficult. A free people, to continuously submit to an authority from without their border's—even if they be a people that have sprung out of the same race, must know that the power of the authority is always exercised first, in the interests of those wiio are subject to that authority. An Imperial Central Authority, holding together, in free unity, a, commonwealth of nations, must, in the exercise of its power, put first the true interests of each country which makes up the group. The neglect of this principle nearly lost Africa. Her people drifted into rebellion. The rein of control, required a light- hand, where, as in the case of the Boers, the people governed were largely of foreign extraction. At the conclusion of the Boer war, with a magnanimity that Edmund Burke would have admired, the English Government, in the interests of the governed, put- first, things first, and conferred an autonomous government upon the people with whom it- had been at war. It is a- difficult question, and yet, notwithstanding its difficulty, it is a question which should be freely considered, and, if it- be possible, answered. In the best- interests of the people of any country to what authority should they submit; first-, as to- external matters, which, in the case of New Zealand, are called Imperial; and second, to what authority should similar submission be extended in all internal or domestic matters? In either case should the authority ‘be absolute, qualified, or limited? If not absolute, in what- direction is the limit to be found? The authority must in its institution be reasonable: it must arise in some way by tradition or by the will o,f the governed, so far ns that will can be freely ascertained. No authority which is usurped, whether it be benevolent, as the later rule of Cromwell over England and Scotland, or malevolent, as the rule of Lenin and Trotsky over Russia, can last-. An old maxim put it .rather well. According to that, the form of government- which is most reasonable, is that- “which is most conformable to the equality that we find in human nature, provided it. be consistent with public peace and tranquility.” Such a definition rather, assumed that the object of government is to preserve freedom from oppression, among individuals and diasses of individuals, one over the other in one country. In the eighteenth century, the idea that the Government itself might act, inadvisedly, in regard to its dominance over its colonies abroad, could hardly arise. The rebellion of America was, at once, a surprise and an education. It. can not bo said, without some hesitation, that it is natural for man to resist authority and rule. Yet there are many indications, particularly among the young, and in .some countries, which point that way. Nature recognises and obeys law. Yet, too, in some respects it is cruel. It builds upon, or rather out of, what it destroys. The result is order and beauty. Out, of destruction arises that which is perfect in form; perfect too, in its order and kind, for development and continuance. What man destroys, ends usually in fragmentary and useless ugliness ; ‘what nature destroys, is restored a thousand fold, in beauty, and service. A government from its very name exists to govern. It influences the making of laws which it is its duty to enforce. It does this through its courts, and also where the State is a large employer of labor, through, its regulations. It is conceivable that, the regulations may he unfair. This is the risk which attaches to tile system, favored by the Labor party in New Zealand of uniting with the normal functions of government the duties of a great- employer of labor. This is an inconvenience inseparable from the system. The Government has to govern. It cannot allow its mandates to be flouted. From, them, there can be no appeal. The only remedy belonging to the people is through their representatives to turn out the old government and to put another government in. A prudent administration will no doubt aliow the fullest inquiry into the grievances of its employees. In- this respect nothing can have exceeded the patience and care of Mr. Coates in his handling of the alleged anomalies both in the Railway and Fostal Departments. Whether it is wise to refer to a commission such a wide agenda, paper as is proposed in the case of the railways is ojren to doubt. Such a subordination of government administrative functions to an irresponsible tribunal always has one great disadvantage that it- conveys an implication that the Government will submit to the find ings of the commission whatever those findings may be, because it expects the employees to be similarly bound. Government by commission is only tolerable where, as is unfortunately the case now in New Zealand, no party is able to supply a government which has a- majority of supporters, independently of recruits, in its lobby from other parties in the House. When authority and rule arc overthrown, in any country, by world catastrophe or revolution, anarchy must take- its place. In time some kind of order conies about: Napoleon at the French revolution found a solution in a whiff of grape shot. In spit© of, and perhaps a little because of recognition by other powers, anarchy and terror, through the red army, still threaten to increase in Russia. Lenin has indeed passed away, but Trotsky remains to carry on and further incite a, reign of terror and persecution, in which the whole l people is sacrificed, to a dream of international rule, under which the rights of humanity override all those other rights, which alone make a- decent, and law-abiding humanity possible.