THE OPPOSITION WRONGLY NAMED

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1240, 23 September 1911, Page 14

THE OPPOSITION WRONGLY NAMED

' Sir,—ln the Honso of Representatives on Wednesday night, Mr. F. Mande'r {member for Maxsucn) mado somo welltimed and very just remarks with respect to tho misapplication of tho word to the Opposition Party. Asa matter of fact (ho said), the OppoBitioo PaTty was wrongly named Conservative, for even in the beginning its mombers were successors and followers of.. Cobdon, Bright,' and Gladstone. If the party had been called Liberals, and their opponents Socialists, or (someone suggested) opportunists, tho names would have been moro fitting." ' These romarks direct attention to a matter of real importance, for, in public affairs, a misleading namo given to a political party may do as much harm to the causo of right-thinking and intelligent action as a wrong label would in trade to fair dealing in a commodity offered for salo to tho people. There never has been a Conservative paTty in New Zealand, and to maintain that there has . been would not only bo, politically, contrary to fact, but, philosophically or as a-matter of reflection, a sheer absurdity. Tho so-called "Conservative" party has becto and is the party of constitutional democracy, which, 'whilo acting in 'accordance with tho law and with tho teachings of experience in both legislation and administration, amd on safe, businesslike principle in tho management of the public finances, has also been steadily progressive, in sympathy with the evolution of popular needs and ideals. This is what tno Political Reform Party is, (Had tho executive of that party is the present Opposition. Honcc, to apply to the Opposition Party the term "Conservative," with a view to associating it in fact or sentiment wffeli tho Conservatives of Britain, is to misuse languago in a distinctly blameworthy maorwr. This it is-equally wiong in tto 'eo-calloa Liberal. Party, to claim a

monopoly of Liberalism in New Zealand politics. As a matter of fact, that party is not devoted to the cause of democratic Liberalism, but that of emotional 'Radicalism, which, in its turn, is duo to mental immaturity, political inexperience, and social impaticnco in certain sections of the people. Democratic liberalism is rationally progressive, and broad-based on the real will of tho people, while emotional Radicalism is spasmodic in its action, becauso it is due to mere whines and moods in popular feeling or opinion, or to appeals made to that feeling or opinion by men who aro not tho serious exponents and champions of true Liberalism—the Democratic Liberalism .which is upheld by tho present Opposition or Political Reform Party in New Zealand. In fact, it is neither unfair nor extravagant to say that the differonce between the Democratic Liberalism of the Opposition Party and the emotional Radicalism of the Seddoa-Ward Continuous Ministry is equivalent to tho difference between tho practice of a duly qualified medical man and that of a dealer in quack remedies. The people will, I am sure, do well to remember this, and also that it is a gross orror in political fact and political philosophy to associate, in any sense or degree, tho Old World term "Conservative" with the Opposition or Political Reform' Party in New Zealand.—l am, etc.,. ' . HISTORICUS.