The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 1911. AN INSTRUCTIVE DUEL.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1141, 31 May 1911, Page 6

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, MAY 31, 1911. AN INSTRUCTIVE DUEL.

There is much that is instructive, for those who wish to look for it, in the rough-and-tumble deputation that took place yesterday between the Minister for Labour and his irrepressible tormentor, Mr. Moriarty. The Minister's admirers will probably see in the incident a signal proof of his firmness in resisting the commands of Labour agitators, but any firmness that was displayed by the Minister was less a constitutional firmness based upon high notions of government than the firmness of irritation against an ancient enemy. Mr. Millar would have returned thwack for thwack in a contest with Mr. Moriarty anyway, and roar for roar; but he was strengthened by the knowledge that Mr. Moriarty is not persona grata with the general body of Labour leaders. The episode, as we have said, is instructive, and_ in more ways than •as a typical picture of what we may call bar-parlour politics. In that aspect it must be as pleasing in its way to the Democrat, this horny-handed, heart-to-heart wrangle, as the continuous spectacle ot Ministers mixing freely with Tom and Bill and arranging those friendly little Democratic deals that. lift our politics so far _ above the politics of other countries. The public outside Weland, to some extent, the public in Wellington also, have a very vague idea as to how the work of government is transacted. They have a kind of notion that Labour legislation is constructed in an atmosphere of nobility and sanctity in the Cabinet room, where the spirit of wisdom settles upon the nationbuilders, dreaming of policies "too huge for mortal tongue or pen of scribe." Perhaps there was a time when conditions of this kind, or something approaching them, did prevail. It is much more comfortable, however, to know that as often as not nowadays the divine Act is settled by one-round scrimmages between Mr. Millar and Mr. Moriarty in the passage. It is more home-like, more like what Democracy can approve; it "comes home to men's business and bosoms." Even if it is disappointing not to know exactly what Mr. Moriarty shouted at the Minister, or what Mr. Millar shouted at Mr. Moriarty, in the ante-room last session, it is comforting to know that the human element was at any rate very strong. Mr. Field, who appears k> have watched yesterday's set-to with deep concern, does not yet understand the spirit of Democratic politics. At one stage, after Mr. Moriauty had given the lie to the Minister, the- member for Otaki intervened to hope "that there was no ill-feeling in the matter." A not unnatural thing to say, of course; but, as the Minister intimated, a quite superfluous thing. There was no ill-feeling, he said. We are surprised that Mr. Field should not have known that it is of the essence of gpod government that a Cabinet Minister and a unionist leader shall be permitted to • enjoy a hearty rough-and-tumble wordslinging whenever they please. Of most interest, however, was the Minister's trump card. "As far as I am concerned," he said, "I don't care if the [Labour] Department is thrown out altogether." "It would be better," was Mr. Moriarty's game reply. Mr. Millar then said that "if the Labour Unions of New Zealand said they did not want the Labour Department he would bring in a Bill to do away with it." This is a valuable admission. Most of us had thought that the retention or the abandonment of a law or a public establishment might not unreasonably be considered a matter to be decided by the people. There is a widespread belief that the Government is in office to carry out the commands of tho public. That, we are to infer from Mr. Millar's statement, is a complete mistake. It is not what the public says that matters, but what the trade unions say. The test is not the public good, or even the public's desire, but the fiat of Labour in council asscmblccl The voice of the general public is nothing to tho Government, mere "babblement," to use a word popular with Chief Justices; the word of command can only come from the mceting-housc of Labour. Bound up with ■ this deplorable popular delusion that the public is the Government's master is the equally foolish superstition that the Labour Department is an organ of government concerned with the interests of the public as a whole. It is nothing of the r kind; as the Minister indicates, it is a branch of trade unionism. So long as it pleases the unions, it will be maintained; if it ceases to please them, Mr. Millar is not the man to force it upon them. Let them say the word, and he will be quite ready to withdraw an unwelcome present to them. As a matter of fact, the public would probably be quite glad to see the Department abolished, but the public does not count. It should consider itself highly favoured by being permitted to p.ay the cost of running the Department. It is for tho unions to say what the Government shall do.