The Club Smoking

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLI, Issue 14, 30 September 1908, Page 4

The Club Smoking

THE Wellington ‘Post,’” began the political member, "has come out with a very trenchant and outspoken article on the decadence of Parliamentary morale. Both parties in the House are treated alike, and the writer states that we have lost the grand traditions of John Ballance, and are merely opportunists, without definite anchorage or policy. Needless to say, the article has excited much comment, and it is likely to give rise to a good deal of controversy. Tliat in itself will be something. For what is there stated is true not only of ourselves, but also of tire great Liberal party at Home. We lack leaders, men who will direct, not follow the people. Our industrial legislation has got in a hopeless mess, the workers are definitely arraying themselves against the employers. More than ever we want men with a definite policy, ready to stand by that policy, and risk defeat at the polls if necessary. We want statesmen—farsighted politicians who can look into the future, and who are determined to do what is best for New Zealand as a whole, not merely what is best calculated to secure the votes of any one section of the community. We don’t want regulations or restrictions; we want liberty, and liberty not for orfe but for all. But we want direction also. We want to feel that we have strong men at the head of affairs, men who would not allow any popular clamour to turn them from their sense of right and duty. Have we got such men?” O © ® "The one place where we have such men,” replied the lawyer, “is on the judicial bench. I don't say it merely because I belong to the legal fraternity myself, but I think men of all sorts and conditions will agree that our judges are absolutely uninfluenced by popular currents of thought and feeling. English ministers invariably uphold their administrators of justice, and people are getting to attach more and more weight to judicial utterances. More abuses are denounced in our law Courts than in our legislative assemblies, because the occupants of the bench are raised above all party considerations, and are able to speak without fear or favour. A politician, on the other hand, is almost bound to consider popular opinion, and to weigh the effect any particular measure is likely to have on the future votes of his constituents. He hardly dares to risk giving offence to any large section of the community.” © © © “Probably Asquith is beginning to feel a few of the difficulties of pleasing all parties,” put in the journalist. “When lie stopped the Roman Catholic procession of the Host he was thinking of the Protectant vote at Newcastle. He entirely forgot the 4000 Irish voters in that town, who have been deeply incensed by his action. The Education Bill at Home was a miserable attempt to please all parties, and ended by pleasing none. The fault of all this shilly-shallying lies, of course, with the electors themselves. They demand men who will carry out some particular policy, instead of getting the best man they can, and giving him a free hand. I should like to see a man get into the House simply pledged to do his best for the country as a whole, not tied to any definite policy. A debate on a bill would then be a consideration of the measure in all its aspects. There would be no foregone conclusion as to how the voting would go. The best intellects in the land would meet together to discuss end decide on a policy to be pursued. The electors would choose the cleverest, most far-seeing, most capable, and upright man they could get, and trust him to do what was best for all. A man would not then be definitely pledged to vote for any measure, and he could carefully weigh all the pros, and cons, before coming to 4 final decision.”

By

HAVANA

“The weak spot,” added the dominie, "in all forms of government is that one section of the community invariably rules the other section. In early stages of a nation’s history the physically strong and bravo rule those who arc weaker. Later you find the rich, the successful, and the intellectually capable acquire ascendency. Then cornea the day when the majority dictates to the minority. Nothing has yet been devised by the wit of man whereby everybody shall have a say in the making of the laws by which he is governed. In England the extreme Tory party and the extreme Labour party are fairly evenly balanced, and the great mass of people, who come between the two, in reality decide all elections. Their vote can never be quite accurately gauged. They are not bound up with existing institutions, neither are they so poorly placed as to be reckless. Hence we get frequent changes of Government, and this seems to be the meanest approach to really representative rule that the world has seen.” © © © "We all forget,” suggested the padre, “that a minority has its rights. Suppose in any electoral district there are 10,000 voters. A candidate may be elected by the votes of 5001, and the other 4999 voters are absolutely unrepresented. Indeed, you may say that in the present state of political parties in New Zealand all those who do not vote for the Government are not represented. The Opposition is equally powerless to either pass or veto any measure. The object of a second chamber is to prevent a majority passing any law that is likely to press with undue harshness on the minority. But our Legislative Council, as at present constituted, hardly achieves that end. We want that at least the Upper House should be raised above all questions of party, and should have wide and uncontrolled powers of dealing with all hasty legislation. We want more people who will study and reflect on the ultimate trend of any movemeait. At present too many people catch up any cry that is popular for the moment without stopping to consider what the result may be a few years hence.” © © © “ In the main,” put In the cynic, ” I am inclined to agree with the writer in the * Post.' The aim of most of our so-called leaders is to avoid giving offence. They can’t do one thing because it will offend the Labour party, and they can't do another thing because it will offend the farmers; and so on through everything. Now to my mind, being only an (old-fashioned .person of (fossilised ideas, a thing is either right or wrong. If it is right, do it, and let who will take offence. If it is wrong, don’t touch it, not even if all the Labour parties, and liquor parties, and prohibition parties, and unions in the world demand it. I can admire a man who advocates any policy because he sincerely believes in it himself; but it is pitiful to see a man espousing a cause he knows in his heart of hearts to be wrong, just because popular clamour demands that he should espouse it.” © © © “ I think,” said the politician, “ that we have a fine example of the true statesman in our present Minister for Labour. Mr. Millar is like adamant in his determination to do what is just and right as between the employer and the worker. On the eve of an election, with all the labour unions howling at him, and deriding him, he has spoken with no uncertain voice ou the subject of arbitration. He realises to the full the immense benefit of the Act to the workers; he knows that only the greatest firmness in enforcing the law can secure to the workers steady and lasting prosperity.

He is not going to sacrifice to-morrow] for the sake of to-day, and he is riskkig his position to savs the workers from themselves. He may, and probably will, lose the support of the extreme section of the labour party, but he has won the allegiance of all men who have the best interests of their country at heart. There are still amongst us men who have not bowed the knee to the Baal of popular clamour and, agitation.”