The Press. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1913. THE STONEWALL- A PRECEDENT.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 14831, 24 November 1913, Page 6

The Press. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 24, 1913. THE STONEWALL- A PRECEDENT.

Deeply concerned as they are over the strike, the public may oe trusted to form a very definite opinion concerning tho disgraceful behaviour of the Opposition in Parliament, lor four days the minority, on the pretence of fighting for some "principle" which nobody has yet discovered, have, by Force of talking rubbish, paralysed the business of Parliament and reduced it to a nullity, and they intend to resume their obstruction to-day. The Standing Orders are as defective in respect of obstruction as they were thirty-two years ago, and what we said then wo can say to-day, as an accurate comment upon the reckless action of Sir Joseph "Ward and his blundering minority. Then, as now, tho Opposition was stonewalling a Government Bill. In our leading article of August 31st, 1881. we said: —

The functions of the Legislature itself aro threatened to be placed in abeyance by the mere physical force tactics of an inconsiderable minority. To state the case thus is to dispose of the question; and this is the only true way in which the case can bo stated. . . .The House as a hody is as effectually precluded from doing its duty as if its members were turned bodily out of the place, or any other method of duresse imposed upon them. ... If the rules °"_™ d House are inadequate to provide for iws ordinary business, which at present they certainly are, they must oe altered and altered again until they do provide for it

As a matter of fact, as a Wellington telegram reminds us, the stonewall was ended by the determined refusal of the Speaker and Chairman to permit tho rules of the House to place Parliament at the mercy of a minority. Sir Maurice O'Rorke's observations aro exactly appropriate to the present situation.. Honourable members (he said) must not suppose that Standing Orders were framed for the purpose of tying the hands of the House, and preventing it from dealing with the matters that the public has sent us here for. I feel ashamed that the people's name should be prostituted by saying that such obstruction of business as we have witnessed is an exhibition on Tjehalf of the peoplo's liberties. Just now the local Opposition' organ is cheering the obstructionists on, and claiming that; a minority in the House may, if it chooses, utterly prevent the transaction of ousiness. In 1881 it took a very different view, and wo are exceedingly, curious to know how it reconciles its present attitude and its defence of Parliamentary anarchy with its sound statement oi the principles which were involved in the ISBI stonewall —principles which are involved in the present case. On August 31st, 1881, our contemporary urged tho stonewallers to cease; "that '• which was meant to hedge round the " freedom of discussion which should be ,; found in all representative assemblies, " they have used to practise the trUsost "degree of license." j Calm reflection (it proceeds) ought to ' convince them i-nat a minority whicfi in deunance of all rulo and principle, defies a majority constitutionally in the right, cannot hope for the sympathy of a pubbc which is animated by a sense of justice, ie should also show them that such an oxamplo is bad for a public which is at present law-abiding. If the representatives of the people break tho laws that arc made for their observance, merely because they cannot have their way when in a hopeless minority, the peoplo will not be long in discovering that laws, which they find inconvenient may be set.at defiance. v Upon this we may observe that unless we aro to think the Opposition a pack of feols—-and they are anything but ■that —we must conclude that they aro aware that their adoption of strike tactics at this juncture is a direct encouragemeut of the lawless organisation now engaged in making war upon the community. On September 3rd, 1881, our contemporary returned to tho subject and said: ,

The stonewallers continue as scandalous as ever. They threaten to hold out against the Bill till the end of tl» present Parliament. The time' has clearly come for action. The absurd spectacle of a minority coercing the majority is not any longer endurable . . . . When the Premier said that this was "the most grievous, the most scandalous abuse of tho forms of the House." he said what found a hearty echo throughout the country far arid wide. . . Tho Premier nas sV* —at "they will not go on with anything else until the Representation Bill has been dealt with , i>y the house," and the Premier must ue ported at all hazards. Of that Bill, the great majority in the House have accepted tho principle. It remains to give effect to that principle.

In all essentials, it will be seen, the cases of Tool ana are on all fours, and Mr Massey can, with entire confidence, proceed to take any measures that may be necessary to restore the rights of Parliament. The Opposition will in. due course pay the penalty of encouraging the lawless minority 1n tho ports by their oustructive tactics inside the House.

A BOGUS "CITIZEXS , MEETING."

Tho so-called "citizens' meeting" in Victoria square on Saturday night ought to have an effect precisely the opposite of that sought by the strike leaders. It was not a meeting of citizens in any proper sense: it did not represent the opinion of the city. The main motion was moved and seconded by men prominent m leading the local agitation against lan- and order, the Federation's assistant organiser delivered a violent

speech, and a collection (of which no mention had been mAde by the strike leader who called the meeting) was taken ap on behalf of the strike. It will be remembered that the Mayor consented to preside on two conditions: first, that- the motion should merely ask the Government to pass legislation, and second, that the speeches should be temperate and moderate. Nobody ought to be surprised that, having secured the Mayor's presence by fair promises, the gentlemen concerned in the affair broke faith on both points with a cheerfulness and completeness which should assuro the Federation Executive that its local agents axe satisfactorily 'solid" in their disregard for pledges and undertakings. Tho Mayor explains to-dgj that when, in his preliminary speech, he commended the resolution to the public, he was quite unaware that it exceeded the terms agreed tir>on. The resolution moved was not the one submitted to him. Wo trust that he will in future realise the rashness of expecting a Red Fed. to keep his word like

a common man. For our own part, familiar as -we are with the code of ethics of the Federation and its friends, we did not think that Messrs Hunter and McCombs would treat so lightly the promises with which they induced the Mayor to preside. For one thing, we did not think they would be so foolish as to attempt such a silly and obvious trick.

As to -the motion itself, it amounted. in effect simply to a request that the Government shall introduce legislation, making illegal the employment of any save Red Feds, on the wharves or on the ships. It need hardly be said that this impudent request will not make the emallest impression upon the Government; indeed, we are disposed to think that even the Opposition will not care to support it, and we can hardly say moro than that. No doubt the gentlemen who misled the Mayor will endeavour to affront the citizens of Christchurch by circulating abroad the

story that a mass* meeting of citizens, presided over by the Mayor, hae called upon the Government to disband the new Arbitration unions, and hand over again to the Red Feds, the control of tho commerce which the community wrenched into its own hands again from tho forces of crime and fraud. The true facts of the meeting, however, cannot be distorted or misrepresented with any success. The action of the strike agents is of a piece with the blundering defiance of facts and of the obligations of good faith that has marked the conduct of the Federation ever since its establishment. The meeting was ostensibly called in order to further the prospects of peace. Peace was tho last thing advocated by any of the speakers. Their addresses were incitements to violence, and the principal speech, was a wild and envenomed appeal to tho ignorance, the passion, and the prejudices of the mob. It is the business of this man from. Milwaukee to stir up strife; his interests do not lie in the cultivation of a peaceful and orderly spirit or a spirit of reason, and justice. The meeting will in no way lessen the determination of the Canterbury community to do its duty and see that tho port is opened for the, transaction of the public's commercial business. On the the bad faith of the strike agents and the venom and violence of the principal speaker will harden public opinion against the forces of crime and disorder. But what we chiefly rogret is that tho feeble-minded dupes of the Federation may be led to display tho brutal and unmanly violenoe which/ it is sought to make synonymous with "the cause-of Labour," and which, as. many telegrams from the North have shown, leads only to gaol.