The West Coast Times. THURSDAY JUNE 27, 1912. THE DAY OF JUDGMENT.

West Coast Times, 27 June 1912, Page 2

The West Coast Times. THURSDAY JUNE 27, 1912. THE DAY OF JUDGMENT.

Even tho longest lano has a turning whilst tho chickens always come home to roost. So too will the Mackenzie Government have to answer for its sins of omission and commission. It will he remembered that when those twenty-two of ‘ho faithful pinned their faith and tho party’s existence upon Mr. Mackenzie, that the country cried out loudly a.i.l demanded that when Mr. Mackenzie choose tho crew that were to man and refit tho battered barque of sham “ Liberalism,” that ho should face the

House and receive tho approval or disapproval of tho moml era. Mr. Mackenzie, probably ill-advised by the vanquished Premier, decided to flout the rights of the people, and will now have to reap what ho has sown. He pushed hack tho evil day to its furthest limit, expecting to ho able to play tho old game of bluff which had gulled tho people so successfully during tho previous six years. How he has dismally failed everybody knows. Failed so signally that his Ministry lias made itself so ridiculous that few, if any, people take it seriously. But tho hour of reckoning is at hand —tho day of judgment is bore. Sir. Mackenzie was so certain that -his Stop-gap Ministry possessed the confidence of the, I l ouse, that Ivo took every precaution to delay mooting tho House to tho farthermost limit. And to-day ho will have to face the music and render an account. We need not dwell upon the, many actions of tho delicate Administration that has held office for three months. These matters will provide topics for one of tho most bitter debates over hold in Parliament, but wo can discuss the probabilities of tho session which opens to-day, providing as it docs, the. Day of Doom for the Mackenzie Government. So much has been made of the question of election pledges that we begin to wonder whether there

really are any electorates in Now Zealand which sent He : r representatives to Parliament, pledged to support Mr. Mackenzie. Wo have watched 'bo political situation very closely, but we have not as yet boon able to discover any such members. It is true that a number of members, some calling th emsolvos “Liberal” candidates and some claiming that they wore “Government” candidate, were returned hut the moment these mend ers discharged their duties to their censtitnents by supporting Sir Joseph Ward in the struggle which took place

in February, that moment they were freed and may now vet as they think best. When the elections were held, iub dy had the faintest suspicion that Sir Joseph Ward would he followed by Mr. Mackenzie, and his hacking of political mcuicerites. Those who had their lingers on the pulse of the Dominion’s political feelings knew that Sir Joseph Ward had rim his race,, lint it was not anticipated that the fate of tlio Liberal Party—disunited and disgruntled—would lie handed over to the tender nurcisn of a Minister who lias lien tenned by one of his erstwhile colleagues as the “ greatest Tory in the country.” From the standpoint of “Liberals,” therefore, it would be

straining party loyalty past breaking point to ho expected to give unquestioned support to a member who may ho able, through a fortuitous concourse of circumstances, to gain possession of the reins of Government.

The general opinion scorns strongly in

favour of sending Mr. Mackenzie and his conglomeration of .political aims and aspirations back into the ranks of private members. They are lit for no higher service, if they are fit for that. The “thirty-eight strong” Refonr. Party standi as an unbreakable square. They have a fixity of purpose, and are imbued with the spilt of loyalty. The Liberal pnty only really comprises thirty-four members—a minority party, having the conditional support of several irresponsible and ungovernable appendages of independents, socialists, labourites and political nonentities who oll'er to run the “ Great Liberal Party,” and keep them on the Treasury Honchos in order to “suck them dry,” as one very outspoken Labourite declared during the short session in February. As we have said before, wc have no admiration for pledge-breakers, but tiie fact must not be lost sight of that there are no members in the present House of Representatives who have given a pledge to their constituents to support the delicate Mackenzie Administration. Wo can quite understand the indifference with which the Ministers of the Ward Cabinet regard the present Government, whilst there are several very strong opponents of the Ministry among Ihe ranks of the Liberal Parly. Bearing all this in mind wo cannot bold out much hope for Mr. Mackenzie and probably by this time next month the Member for Figment will be fe’eling exceedingly displeased with himself for grasping the shadow of the Prime Ministership when he could have had the substance in thp High Commissionership. The erstwhile Conservative has made many blunders but perhaps the biggest one ho over made was when he preached the doctrine of self-abnegation and forgot to poetise it.