MR HUGHES RESIGNS.

Southland Times, Issue 19757, 3 February 1923, Page 4

MR HUGHES RESIGNS.

Although the Australian Nationalists steadfastly refused to accept the terms offered by the Country Party under Dr. Earle Page while they included the demand for the resignation of Mr Hughes, only twenty-four hours were needed for a change in the position.' All along the weakness of the Country Party’s case was the personal character of the objections to an arrangement between the two anti-Labour groups and the difficulties which beset the Nationalists as soon as they began casting about for a successor to the man who led Australia through the war. From the announcement of the election results it looked as if Mr Hughes was doomed, but he has extricated himself from so many tight corners and has so often snatched victory out of the teeth of seemingly inevitable

defeat' that it was unwise to prophesy his downfall. All along, of course, he has been open to attack because in the confederation that was known as the Nationalists his personal following was smaller than that of any of the “sectional leaders,” and there was always the chance that a combination in the ranks behind him would leave him high and dry. That never occurred so far as the public knows, but one of the explanations of that admirable fact was the fact that Messrs Bruce, Watt, and Pratten were all “in the running” for the post, and some little time ago there were other “strong men” who were looked on as being capable of jostling Mr Hughes from the leadership. Mr Bruce is the most likely man in the conglomerate party, and some time ago, it will be remembered, we mentioned him as the Nationalist with the biggest chance of succeeding to the premiership. He has shown a firm grasp of financial matters and of the ministry which worked with Mr Hughes was the minister who displayed the greatest independence. From the course events have taken, it seems fairly clear that while the negotiations with the Country Party were on, personal ambitions were bandied about in such a way that no one cared to put the unity of the organisation to the strain of making a choice. The Nationalists voted their confidence in Mr Hughes and turned down Dr. Page’s terms, and then the man who led the country through the war calmly stepped down, and found that a new leader could be selected without disruption. Dt, Page may come to some arrangement with the Nationalists, but it is probable that the party in power will not now be so easy to deal with. Mr Hughes’ resignation brings to a close a career which has been astonishing. Though handicapped by disabilities which most men would regard as a complete disqualification for any politician, Mr Hughes, who was really the premier when Mr Andrew Fisher held that position, was the fighting and the administrative head of the Government practically all through the war and throughout the difficult post-war period. He split with the Labour Party over the conscription issue and became the apostle of a fierce participation in the war against Germany. His fiery eloquence brought him into bitter conflict with the Labour Party and with religious factions, and in addition he had many enemies in the party he was leading, but he carried on and in spite of fierce denunciations of his foes, did a lot of magnificent work for which Australia in later years will bless his name. His downfall cannot raise any analogy in this country, though certain Liberals who are greedy for office will doubtless regard Mr Hughes’s action as an example for Mr Massey to follow, but the whole point of the matter is that Mr Hughes was never the accepted leader of a united party. He was the head of an association of groups, and his following was exceedingly small. Nothing of ths kind can be found in the political problem in this country, but if the analogy is drawn it will be well for Mr Wilford to realise that the conclusion of the political manoeuvres in Australia, did not leave the leader of the middle party in office as Prime Minister.