Fair Play WELLINGTON, SEPTEMBER 1, 1894. Leadership by Bequest.

Fair Play, Volume I, Issue 25, 1 September 1894, Page 19

Fair Play WELLINGTON, SEPTEMBER 1, 1894. Leadership by Bequest.

Lovely woman’s charms, her tender solicitude, her power of casting a mysterious, fascinating glamour over her male victim) which compels him to satisfy her insatiable curiosity have been the means by which many a State secret has been revealed and many a noble head brought to the scaffold. In certain historic instances the mischief has been effected by one woman, has borne record of the inequality of the sexes in the art of secrecy, and has powerfully illustrated the existence of that indefensible instinct which impels all men to be confidential in the presence of woman —especially a pretty one. In the case of Sir Robert Stout’s recent disclosures to the Wanganui Women ! s Political League, we'must admit that the circumstances under which this extraordinary and injudicious revelation occurred.were somewhat extenuating. However we may condemn the man who cannot preserve his inscrutability against the attacks of a single syren, we can only pity the unfortunate victim whohas succumbed to numbers—combined and organised —whose expectancy and receptivity would magnetically transmit itself to their prey, and induce him to unburden his soul to an extent which the thumb-screw or wild horses could not have effected.

j3o far as the fact of Mr. Ballance having expressed a wish that the leadership of the Liberal party should devolve on Sir Robert, we do not impugn the statement, and regarded in the sense of conveying Mr. Ballance’s appreciation of Sir Robert’s ability, and expressing an anxiety that the advanced - policy he had planned should be effectively carried out after his death—it merely affords interesting evidence of that absorbing desire to forward the welfare of the people which distinguished the wljole of Mr. Ballance’s career. But while fully acknowledging his merits, we cannot permit even the wish of a honoured and revered patriot toi)e used as an instrument for the infringement of Democratic principles, or to produce a political atavism, which .would be decidedly reactionary, and a most unmistakable retrogression towards the “ divine right of kings.” The only people whose wishes respecting the Premiership can be taken into account are the living Democracy of New Zealand; we not only believe that had Mr. Ballance recovered he would have retracted his wish, but that the present moment would have found Sir Robert maintaining the same

attitude towards the Ministry. Unquestumably, Sir R. Stout is one of the most brainy and cultured men in the House. But two things militate against him. It is a known scientific fact* that there is a certain ossification about the mental processes of giant intellects which prevents thorn assimilating popular ideas, and reciprocating the feelings of the people with a promptitude and effect which is absolutely necessary in a Democratic states* man. There is also a growing belief that, like Herbert Sponcor, the sentiments of his generous youth have been, if not suppressed, vet considerably modified. The “ social Delilah” Ims wound her arms around him and enveloped him in an atmosphere of mild conservatism. “ Evil communication corrupts good manners.”

From almost every point of viow, Sir Robert’s Wanganui disclosure is a matter for regrot. It has irritated many earnest. Democrats, and laid the foundation for the suspicion that from t either ambition or .lovo of power ho desires the Premiership. • If ofiered as a contradiction to the implication that Mr. Ballance had expressed similar wishes in rospoct to Mr. Setldon, the present Premier, it was unnecessary, as the amount of crcdohoe given to that statement was insignificant. IthaH also tho appeal f ance of a deliberate bid for tho support of a sox whoso reeont ad* < vent to the political sphere, and whose natural proferonco of sen* timent to reason have long made them a fruitful soil for all, quackery and charlatanism, and willing tools in the hands of every reactionary party. Only in one way can it do good. ,It Bhows Democracy that a series of stern lessons must bo glvon to all leaders, or would-be loaders, who make their duty to tho ; people subversive to their desire for office or power, or for personal gain. This has been tho great weakness of the Liberal party, and has been abundantly exemplified, from the “ grab”, * after the Premiership to the multitude of candidates which force themselves forward at every election and injure the interests of the cause. The Seddons. Bussells, Stouts, McKenzies, Duthies, and Bells must be taught that their mere personality is not valued at, a brass farthing -we do not want leaders. We want capable, trustworthy, honest delegates and executive officers to carry out the wishos of the people. The time is not far distant when the display of any special ambition for office, or barnacle-like desire to-stick to it, at any price, will be a Certain forerunner of ignominious defeat at the next election. Wo pay our members to carry on tho business of tho country, not to fight for the spoils. “ Whoever will save his life shall lose it.”