The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1910. THE GOVERNMENT'S LATEST TRIUMPH.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 945, 12 October 1910, Page 4

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1910. THE GOVERNMENT'S LATEST TRIUMPH.

;■ We dealt-briefly on Saturday ; with the ''significance ■ of, the twcA rebuffs' which ; the .Government ; , sustained during, the discussion of-the Estimates on Friday afternoon last, or, .rather, with the -significance, of .the Government's manner of receiving such : defeats.'' One of these' incidents was the carrying of a; motion by Mr; Fobbes -for .'the reduction, of the. vote for the refurnishing of the Govern-, ment House at Auckland. This vote was reversed at' a later. stage on Friday, but.it is highly .probable that will be made during the' session to restore the original direction to,the Government to pay no attention to the 'clamour, of our Northern friends. We are really almost at,.a loss to know what to.say' of-the Government's: behaviour in this matter. It decided some months ago to do away with the Government H.ouse,_ and 'proceeded' to'-dismantle' ; the building,' and for a little space of. time it held out"agairist : the fierce protests from;the press and people' :of Auckland. The Peime .Ministee and Me. Fowlds both: declared positively that the building"was to: be dismantled, but early, in May the Peime Ministee began to.V shuffle, and declared that the- Government had done nothing, but would submit the'qiiestipn ,to tne'House.-. Hewas absent from the Chamber when -. the first vote 'was taken on: Friday, and; when the Becond occasion for considering the' matter arose, he appealed, to' the House' to reverse its former, vote, bringing forward the- astound-. ing: plea that the Auckland' Govern-' ment, House could only be abolished with the concurrence of the Home .'Office. ..;■ :.'V.:.:;:',;-^''-;."•,:■„ '■,

\The Peime Ministee has. only himself to blame if the public views this plea: with deep suspicion. In any event, it is the, duty of the Peime Ministee to explain ;why<he,never referred to the Home Office before, and how,the Home Office'has 'any more to do with the matter now than it.had when : the Government first_decided to do away with the establishment; as an Executive act. : We'need not say more of his importation of the, Governoe's name into; the debate than that it was an offensive and unconstitutional, thing to > do.What does merit attention is the attitude which" has ibeen taken up,;in this matter by the .',Duhedin, bidr, which printed on Saturday a remarkable editorial ff.om which we quote some extracts in another icolumh. The' Peime .'Minister .-isi:there-'.' described as truckling to; "the parochialism of the Auckland phalanx.": His "shiftiness," says the Star, : ".has become the "talk of: the: - country.". "No amount, of ...sophistry," so : - this very candid friend continues, i "on. the part of ,Sie Joseph .will rub .out the ugly. fact, that; he, has made'a complete and abject surrender to the, blatant pretensions of an Auckland claque to be'considered the 'hub' of the Dominion. ■;■■ •'. .

The public conscience'will assuredly not easily nor quickly recover irdm the shock it received when it learned that a number of •members had forsworn their independence of thought and action in order to help Minis--ters but of a tight corner, into which they-wore driven by'their own want of backbone."' '.'. ' '■■' .'."' Now, if this comment had appeared in our as our Own, the Prime Ministee, would have lost no opportunityof saying that it was evidence of; our inability to _ be fair to : him—he would have put it much more violently than that, of course —but the Star 'has for many years been the most faithful of the. Government's newspaper .friends and admirers. 'That its friendship and admiration have generally been sincere is not to be doubted, and its present indignation and'-'disgust arc therefore of very great significance. For it must not be overlooked that the Star's loyalty would carry it to very great lengths in supporting the Prime Minister. But there arc gulfs of disagreement, that loyalty cannot bridgo, a point at which, with the bestwillin the world, it is impossible for friendship to swallow its honest; disgust. That the words, we have quoted express the opinion of the great majority in the Dominion is beyond question; fOr - even Auckland's satisfaction at the result of the second vote will go hand in' hand with contempt for the shuffling that ended in a cowardly surrender. The highest significance of the Star's article, for which our contemporary deserves very great credit, is in the fact that these occasional explosions

of irrepressible feeling argue a great volume of suppressed discontent with a.nd distrust of the Government amongst its friends. That is tho encouraging lesson of our contemporary's striking article, but there is another lesson in it which calls for a word'or two. The Star itself has fought as vigorously for wild-cat railway, projects . in Otago as Auckland has fought for the retention of its Government House. Now, we believe that the Auckland people honestly think the Government House should bo retained, and that the Star and tho Otar/o Daily Times are perfectly sincere in their defence, of the Otago Central and Lawrence-Eoxburgh railways. "Local patriotism" is generally, we are glad to say, based on local sincerity, You cannot eliminate, the parochial spirit. .It should therefore hardly be necessary to point out that the machinery of na,7 tional government should be so adjusted as to prevent parochialism from operating against the national interest.;: The national: interest is not served .by a system that enables a time-serving Ministry to work the rival paroohialisms :to. its party advantage by surrendering. to one • of them , after the -other. What is wanted is a system of . administration . that will strike a balance of justice all round instead of.', that balance .sl robbery and waste : all round ■ from which _ nobody but the party in:power.derives any real advantage.; :.;...■'