West Coast Times WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1909. SIR JOSEPH'S DEPARTURE.

West Coast Times, 23 June 1909, Page 2

West Coast Times WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 1909.

SIR JOSEPH'S DEPARTURE.

The "Dominion" which" may be termed the organ of the Opposition in Wellington had a leading article in its issue of Saturday last on the -above subi ject in which it vaid : — There are few people who will not repiobate the outburst of hostile feeling that marred the Prime Minister's departure for London. In the past few* Ndays we have expre^ed the indignation which the majority of the people feel at the Prime Minister's arrogant subordination of the public interest to his private convenience, or, what is the same thing, his party convenience Wa still hold the strongest views on that point, but we hold also — and the majority of those present on the wharf nin,? out of every ten of whom think as we do on this matter, showed by their decorous behaviour that they share this view — that the major, the dominant circumstance yesterday afternoon was that the representative of New Zealand was leaving to attend a Conference concerning the objects or which there is only one opinion in the Empire. It was a minority only that abused the occasion by hooting. The vast majority of the crowd were merely sightseers. That vast iriajority, however, did not cheer; they kept silence. They had too correct an understanding of the position to spoil the occasion; but the behaviour of the Prime Minister himself had made it impossible for them to exhibit the enthusiasm which in other circumstances thoy would have considered the occasion warranted. The Prime Minisiter did a great deal more than injure the country's interests wben he dragooned the House into subservience to his persona^ will. That was fllmcst a small offence compared with the violence which he did to the Imperialist affections of of the nation. He actually, brought a- 1 bout this painful result, that the best Imperialists of this country were robbed of all pleasure in the dispatch of their delegate to a Conference summoned for one of the very highest of Imperial purposes. There is one aspect of +he affair which cannot have been missed by anybody, high or low, thoughful or frivolous. Nobody, whoever he may be, fan have failed to moke a mental comparison between the actual farewell and the farewell that would have been witnessed had the Prime Minister allowed the session to go on. Had he not insisted on his party convenience against the Jianifest interests of the nation — had he not affronted the dignity of Parliament and the country — he would have leceived a farewell which would have been a fragrant, memory for him to the end of his days. That we may not be misunderstood, we must repeat that condemn without qualification the incontinence of those who were enable to control their jusfc resentment of the Prime Minister' 3 action in insisting on the shelving of the country's business. But we can sympathise with the silence of the majority of the assemblage. To most of the onlookers it must have been a painful shock when they saw that the Prime Minister had deemed it necessary to surround himself with a bodyguard of police. There is no need for more than the mere statement of the fact that that bodyguard was entirely unnecessary. Nor do we care to talk of the gross insult in the supposition that it was either necessary or a wise precaution. Violence against any Minister, such violence as would require police protection, is utterly inconceivable. But — to suppose for a moment what is really not supposable at all— let us suppose that there had been even a small display of violence. The sharpest objectors to the Prime Minister as a domestic politician would have been the first to crush any disorder. Whatever their political views, they could not sympathise with physic« al violence as a means of expressing their resentment. Nothing that has yet occurred has so emphatically demonstrated the Prime Minister's misunderstanding of public' feeling than his toleration of a police escort. Again and again, since he took the reins of office, Sir Joseph Ward has displayed what, considering the length of his political career, is a thoroughly amazing want of understanding of the popular mind. Never before, however, has he shown that his incomprehension goes so far as such a want of faith in the people. He is even more hopelessly out of touch with public sentiment than we had imagined, or, indeed, than we ever imagined possible in any politician.