The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1910. PREMIER'S VOLTE-FACE.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIIC, Issue 14324, 14 October 1910, Page 4

The Timaru Herald. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1910. PREMIER'S VOLTE-FACE.

The fuller report which we republish from a Wellington paper, and subsequent proceeding's of tlie committee set up to inquire into Mr Iline's charges, show that what we suspected to be a makebelief volte-face on the part of the Prime Minister was a real one. We are accustomed to the unique facility of Sir Joseph Ward in turning- right-about-face 'on any public question when a little opposition is encountered, but we did not think that he would execute a somersault so quickly as to suggest, almpst at the first meeting of the select committee, the setting up of the Iribunal which he had persistently opposed whenever it was mentioned in the House. At the instance of Sir Joseph Ward, his majority in the House threw out the proposal to appoint two Judges to investigate the charges made by Mr Hine. Now, at the instance also of Sir Joseph Ward, the committee to which the duty was entrusted of inquiring into these allegations has resolved to transfer its responsibility to the same tribunal which previously a majority of its members, following the ' Prime Minister's example, declared to be unnecessary. Is it any wonder that the Independent Wellington journal from which we have taken our supplementary report this ruor.ling' describes the Prime Minister's motion as "a bolt from the blue," or that, on the meagre evidence of the Press Association report supplied to us, we were scarce able to believe that Sir Joseph Ward was in earnest in his remarkable change of front ?

lii proposing tlie motion which amounted to a re versal of his previous attitude throughout this question, the Prime Minister said that as Mr Hine had now given the names and the cases h<T was of opinion that it would be far better that a commission should be set up to refer the matter to the Supreme Court, as was originally asked by Mr Hine. He said he had stated in the House that he was prepared to hare a public inquiry, and "I had in mv mind all the time that the moment we got the charges we should refer the matter to the Supreme Court." (Reports in other papers state, rlnnVtflmrvrf covv-n+ly " tILD

Judges of the Supreme Court.") "I recognise," said the Prime Minister again, " that in cases of the kind now on record it might be open to the imputation that a committee of members of Parliament may not go exhaustively into the matter and give an unprejudiced report." How completely different were the statements of the Prime Minister in the House! 'As against his declaration that he "had it in his mind all the time" to refer the charges to two Judges, we find him saying, as recently as September 29th (we quote from Hansard) : "I feel it is my duty to ask that this matter should be referred to a special committee, so that _ that _ committee may make full investigation not only into the four cases named by the honourable gentleman, but into any other cases of a similar nature. .... I am of the opinion that the committee can obtain the fullest information, all of which will be put on record, and all the evidence concerning which will be available, and we c-an ascertain whether there is any member of the present House or of a former House who has acted corruptly in connection with the public affairs of this country, or whether there is any justification in any way whatever for that general imputation existing against members of Parliament generally." Can anyone find here any ulterior suggestion that the committee should transfer its task to Judges? ;,£r Hine repeatedly stated in the House that if the Prime Minister would set up the tribunal asked , for he wo.iild give the names :.ud full particulars of his charges. And what did the Prime Minister reply? "I asked the honourable gentleman," recalled Sir Joseph Ward on September 29th, , give us the names openly, publicly, when I would state without any reservation what the duly of the Government would be '..uder the circumstances." Nothing more explicit than that. And, as regards the Prime Minister's belated discovery that a select vr-m----mittee might be thought not to have gone exhaustively into the matter, or not to give an tnij.j-e----judiced report, it is interesting to recall the outburst made by him when he proposed to substitute his select committee for the Lands Committee: "I resent with very considerable indignation—and T want it to be observed that I am speaking coolly —a suggestion made in reference to the L-.-n :s Committee, imputing that tb?y are not honest men. I the suggestion that the ten members of the House who m; if f.:nn the proposed committee vill not inquire fully and impartially ini/j the whole of the circumstances; .that they will not examine l'uliy and fairly the evidence th.ir. be laid before them, and tint will not record fully anything connected with a matter of tLn sort." As to the suggestion lii-ii the committee would not have time to finish the inquiry before the end of the session, it is obvious that if Sir Joseph Ward had set tip either a commission or committee to investigate the charges when they-.; were first made eight weeks ago, its report could have been received before now.

It has been suggested that the reason' which induced the Prime Minister to chauge his mind was possibly that lie found the charges neither so serious nor so closely affecting" his party as he had feared they might be. We are glad that the charges will be dealt with by the tribunal we have always urged as the most fitting, and we do not think it worth while to consider what has made the Prime Minister change his mind. He is accustomed to change hi.i mind so often, when he fears that a decision or course of action may have lessened his popularity in any quarter, that to commence the practice of such inquiries would be to embark upon a never-ending speculation. "A disgraceful volte face," is the description applied by the Dunedin "Evening Star," the most loyal of Government organs, to the Government's recent attitude on the question of the Government House at Auckland. " The change of front by the Government," it said, " is thoroughly understood by the people at large, and no amount of sophistry on the part of Sir--Joseph Ward will rub out the ugly fact that he has made a complete and abject surrender to j the blatant pretensions of an Auckland claque to be considered the 'hub' of the Dominion." We will not describe the Prime Minister's latest volte-face as "disgraceful," because though we deplore the method we are glad for the result, but to the Government's friends it must be no less surprising and humiliating than surrender of a week ago ; which we find thus strongly stigmatised by its most faithful jour- i nalistic supporter.