The Wanganui Chronicle TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1925. THE ALTERNATIVE

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LXXXII, Issue 19433, 20 October 1925, Page 6

The Wanganui Chronicle TUESDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1925. THE ALTERNATIVE

“The alternative to Reform is.” the Victoria Avenue oracle sententiously declares, “the National Party, and by voting in their candidates electors will help the rfeturn of government by Liberal principles, which in the past proved so beneficial to the country.” Most people seem to think that the alternative to Reform is Labour; that the issue to be decided on November 4 is whether Now Zealand is to continue to enjoy freedom under the care of the present Government or to be enslaved by the extreme Socialists. A consideration of what the National Party is, and is not. may throw some light on the matter. What is it that the National Party would aim to do if utterly unforeseen circumstances gave it any power in the next Parliament? Mr. Forbes, the leader of the National Party, says that he would not vote to put Reform out and Labour in, and that has always been the creed of his first lieutenant, Mr. Sidey. Mr. Veitch aspires to a prominent place in the party, and we are not aware that he has declared himself plainly on this point. Mr. Atmore, another of the campaign orators of Nationalism, has said that no vote of his will put the “party of destruction” nearer the Treasury benches.

In the Tauranga and Waitomo electorates, where Labour is not represented by candidates, the Nationalists both say that they will vote for Labour against Reform. They want the Labour vote at any cost. Another Nationalist candidate, the redoubtable Mr. Oakley Browne, says he will vote with Mr. Holland or anyone else on a no-confidence motion against Reform. At Ashburton the Nationalist, Mr. R. Galbraith, is pledged not to vote Labour into office against Reform, and Mr. Horn, the Nationalist candidate for Wakatipu, is similarly bound. Where does the National Party stand? Apparently all over the shop. If its members are so curiously divided over the most important question they have to answer, surely they would be a queer conglomeration it any number of them got into the House. The electors want to know what they are voting for. They know what Reform is and what Labour is, but what is Nationalism? Certainly neither fish, flesh, nor fowl. Can it be merely a red herring?