The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1880. THE ELECTIONS IN VICTORIA.

New Zealand Tablet, Volume VII, Issue 379, 23 July 1880, Page 13

The New Zealand Tablet. Fiat Justitia. FRIDAY, JULY 23, 1880. THE ELECTIONS IN VICTORIA.

♦ HE recent elections in Victoria are most instructive. To understand the full import of this instruction, it is necessary to recall to mind some events of the recent past. Four years ago, what is comically called the Liberal party made overtures to the Catholics of the country to support them on the understanding that justice should be done them in the matter of education. The Catholics trusting in the promises of certain politicians, generally supported the Berry candidates. But no sooner was his party installed in power than their leader, the Premier himself ostentatiously paraded his hostility to their just claims, and lead his party, or at least the majority ot it, in opposition to their views. The Catholics, as might reasonably be expected resented this conduct, and determined to be no longer dragged at the chariot wheels of any political party, and resolved to assume an attitude of impartial hostility to all parties, and candidates inimical to justice to their schools. An opportunity soon presented itself of testing the sincerity of this resolution. The Berry, or as it is sometimes mis-called the Liberal party, appealed to the country on the constitutional question of the day in Victoria, with the result now notorious. The constituencies declared against it, a result owing in no small degree to the adverse Catholic vote. Mr. Service came into power, and as one really devoted Catholic held a portfolio in his Ministry, great hopes were entertained by some of a favourable consideration of the claims of Catholics for aid to their schools out of the public funds, which they had themselves contributed. We must say we never shared in these hopes. The presence of Mr. Francis in the Cabinet forbade us to do so, bearing in mind, as we did* that he was the Premier of the Ministry which carried through Parliament the godless system of education at present established in Victoria. Unfortunately our previsions were realised, and a second time Catholics, were deceived in the friends to justice they fancied they had secured by their votes at the elections which carried Mr. Service into power. After a short session of two months His Excellency the Governor of Victoria, following the advice of Mr. Service, who had been outvoted on the constitutional question, dissolved Parliament. Now, again the Catholics had an opportunity of punishing the enemies of justice, and as in duty bound they availed themselves of it. It is admitted on all hands that the Catholic vote during the two last general elections contributed largely to the victories gained alternately by the opposing parties. This is just as it should be. The constitutional question, as it is called, is a purely party question, and need have no existence at all. It could be settled in five minutes, if parties cared to settle it. All that is required is that the Lower House should abstain from the unconstitutional practice of tacking to many Bills obnoxious clauses which have nothing whatever to do with

these Bills. This is a practice which ought not to prevail, and which does not exist in any other country in which there are two Houses of Legislature formed on the British model. It is the House of Representatives that is really to blame, and not the Legislative Council, which has in no instance acted either illegally or unconstitutionally. But it would appear that this easy, plain, common sense view of the matter does not recommend itself to either of the dominant parties in Victoria. It does not suit their merely party purposes. Their party squabbles, therefore, are a matter of no interest whatever to the Catholic body, which holds itself aloof from both, so long as both ignore or oppose their just claims to a fair share of the public funds, set apart for education, in aid of their own schools. Both parties were warned in turn that Catholics would have recourse to impartial hostility to both and all parties, so long as they refused to do them justice on this most important question. But they heeded not the warning, and the result is, both the liberal and constitutional parties, each in its turn, have been punished alike. The block- vote, therefore, which New Zealand politicians have affected to despise, has proved itself an efficacious instrument, a sharp rod, and an apt means of chastising injustice, and the contempt with which supercilious politicians when in power are accustomed to tr<*at Catholic claims. Godlessness has once more overeached itself, as Mr. Service now perceives to his cost. A few more lessons of this sort will not be without their effect. Politicians who are now so blind will soon recover their eyesight. The block-vote will, without doubt, work not a few political miracles. But a few more lessons will be required.