The Waikato Times With which is incorporated The Waikato Argus. THURSDAY, MAY 13, 1920. THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT

Waikato Times, Volume 92, Issue 14362, 13 May 1920, Page 4

The Waikato Times With which is incorporated The Waikato Argus. THURSDAY, MAY 13, 1920. THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT

There is an interesting cablegram which recently appeared that may not receive the attention it deserves. Mr Bonar Law is reported to hityc said that the question whether industry should lie nationalised or continue lo he conducted by private enterprise must he fought out in the Cabinet, and that he was determined not to compromise in that respect. The question of nationalisation has, of course, been a, strong point with coal miners, who have urge;! it in season and out of seasori, but H cannot he said that it has attracted any general support, and even the miners have been unable to make any unanimous demand. The question came lo the front in consequence of the demands made by miners early in 1911) for increased wages, and the curious position of the industry in which not .enough coal was raised for the requirements of the country while at die same time a price was obtainable for coal which was‘exported which loft an immense profit. This made it necessary that an arrangement should he made that those who exported should he taxed in favour of those who sold locally, in I lie same manner as was practised here over hullcr, although with more .instilledlion, it has been thought by same per-

sons that if the Government had to interfere in any way with the industry it would he as well that they should take it over entirely, and English opinion has been divided on the point for the past 12 months. During that period it can hardly be said that nationalisation has made great progress with those in authority, but there is some uncertainly about Hie manner in which it may be regarded by thennass of the electorate.» During the earlier part of 1919 the Labour party had some phenomenal • victories at by-elections, and at that time conceived the idea that it was but. a matter of time before ."'hey were in sufficient strength to form a Government. The last few elections, however, have not been so favourable to thc.r prospects, and it i£ difficult to form any idea about the prospects of the party at tlie present time. There can, however be little doubt about iiow the > question lias been regarded by business people, and by those who, .are more capable of forming a judgment. The Unionist party made it clear from the first that they were opposed to rationalisation; and Mr Asquith opened up his election campaign by a clear statement that he was opposed to anything of tlu kind. The Cabinet, however, had not made their position clear; In fact tl.iey first stated that they accepted-Mr Jus--ticc Sankcy’s scheme in favour of nationalisation, and t'hen changed their minds on the point. Mr Bonar Law has apparently given the explanation of the j*; Inconsistency, and Mas furnished on* more instance of Ids capacity of think■ing aloud, for it can hardly he regardedas prudent to advertise trie fact that there are differences of opinion in the Cabinet on such a matter as nationalisation, about which it is necessary to come to some decision at an early date. The supporter of nationalisation in Hie Cabinet can scarcely be other than Mr Lloyd George, for he is die only man whose support would be effective. Mr Bonar Law’s declaration, therefore, would imply that on a matter requiring early decision lie and the Prime Minister are of different opinions and ho adds that lie is not prepared to compromise. It may be said that it would be no good if lie did, for ajarge part-of his following would desert him, and \n fact the Labour party are the only genuine supporters of such a policy. But then the question arises why Mr ,*Joyd George should espouse nationalisation. It is quite inconsistent with re lent declarations on ids part that he regarded the growth of the Labour party as a menace to the stability of the country, \yliilc lie thought that Mis Government was the only effective barrier to that growth.* It is hard to reconcile the idea of ins advocating nationalisation with Mis recent attitude, yet it is difficult to read any other meaning into Mr Bonar Law’s statement.

It is in all cases only a matter'of time before questions like this arise in which men genuinely differ ki opinion. Then they' form parties 'to urge their side of the case. If such questions are not pressing at any time, party relations are only too apt to degenerate into personalities. With some people who are not particularly lit to form an intelligent opinion, personal feeling always enters into the attitude towards any question. The. weakness of Coalition Governments is - one side or the other has to make a surrender on essential points,'and they seldom curry with them the support of their constituents in such surrender. The entry of Mr Asquith to the House has changed the complexion of parties. It is clear that the support of the Liberal parly in the country will be given to his followers, and llie Coalition Liberals can scarcely hope for rc-elcction under such circumstances. At the general election of 1918 the Unionists won a sweeping victory by sending a Coalition Liberal and a Unionist to contest doubtful seats. The Liberals divided their vole and the Unionist was returned. Naturally they have not been a very happy family and it was only the absence of any effective opposition that prevented the rift becoming manifest. To-day the Unionists think Hie time has come to take the reins into their own hands. The Spectator, which still carries weight, lias been hinting at such a coarse for-some months. Mr Austen Chamberlain's Budget is the expression of his own opinion rather Ilian - that of Mr Lloyd George, if we may judge from the line taken, by thp latter in the autumn of 1919. Mr Bonar Raw's statement seems to be one more straw showing how tin wind JHows. If, however, the Unionist party make up their mind to throw over Mr Lloyd George he is Hie last man t) lake such treatment quietly, and would doubtless advise Hie King to dissolve the House. This, however, is one of the limited number of subjects upon which the King could exercise his own judgment, or could take the advice of others. It is. possible that he might refuse to dissolve in which case the Conservatives arc in sufficient strength to outvote all other sections of the House.

It is difficult to know how far personal ambitions enter into the movements of politicians. .Party politics, like State politics, are matters in which men do not observe the rules of morality that guide them in the ordinary matters of life, flavour is quoted els saying, “If we did for ourselves what we do for the Slate what rascals we should be.” It is unfortunately true that the satne holds g - ood ;n party politics, and it is tig) besetting danger of democracy. The question is both moral and intellectual, and more education will not mend the matter if it is not accompanied by more respect for truth and more liking for fair play. We can only hope for the growth of these qualities, hut Ihere'arc times when the lade of them is painfully apparent.