NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1297, 28 November 1911, Page 6

NOTES OF THE DAY.

We must confess to feeling rather puzzled by the attitude of Mn. D. M Laken- towards the Government. He was asked some questions on the subject on Saturday night, as we reported yesterday, and was induced, after some difficulty, to announce himself as a, supporter of the Government. His reluctance to answer promptly the questions put to him— it seems to have taken three questions to make evasion quite impossible—is rather unintelligible in view of the fact that his mind seems to lie made up to develop into a faithful prop of the Ward Administration. He stated definitely that if a plain modon of want-of-confidence' were moved in the Govcrnmentr-tlm question assumed, for the sake of a-rgu- ] ment, we suppose, that the Government would at any rate meet Parliament as a. Government—he would follow Sir Joseph Wakd into the lobhy Iμ^ 1 ! llcrc to Proclaim an attitude that docs not appear to be shared by the other local Labour candidates, but perhaps he «njovs a special position in the Labour world. We should be sorry to see him develop into a sound 'Wardito like Mr. Arxold, for while we disagree in some very important particulars with our Labour friends our notion of good government, aa we long ago began to insist, is (Jin true representation of Labour and a 1 important .sections of opinion, lift. Jl'Larkx, \rc take it, keeuiy desires flic continuance in office of .Sirt JoswH Ward. As we liav.j wiiil, this is puzzling. He declared, incidentally, that in sonic respects the I.Joform parly is worse llian the Government. He did not. say in wh a |, inspects he thinks this is true. Ho knows wjjjt, Uk Reform party pro-' poke, Caa he ay wkre the -Itcform ,

party is «ort« tban f.hc \\'.uu> \>,iriy I Or was ho speaking at nimloin { Wo fiineiotl ho miglit haw had lli'j limil questiou in mind, but a moiin.-iit's rnfloction showed us that, (i sensible man like Mk, Jl'Lahen could not possibly say of the Government., in the matter of land policy, anything hut that it is shady and opportunist in the highest degree, ready to do anything, and ready to betray anybody.

That very dilapidated fall-back of embarrassed Ministerialists, the cry that the critics of the Government are "damaging the credit of the country," has boon taken up bv Dβ. Izard as part of his election plan of campaign. It is a little difficult to picture so humorous a person as the Government candidate for Wellington North in a serious role, and probably Dr. Izard was chuckling inwardly as he'trotted out this hoary chestnut with all the solemnity ho could muster for the occasion. Dit. Izard may not take politics very seriously, but we give him credit for knowing that the Government and the country are two quite different things. The Government is ri pet of men—the Ward Administration— whoso actions may, and we believe have, damaged the country. If in exposing the misgovernment of the Ward Administration the country is damaged, as well as the Ward Administration, Dr. Izard surely will see that it is the Ward Administration, and not those who expose its misdeeds, who arc to blame. Dn. Izard, as the other Ministerialists who raise this bogey, however, knows quite well that any exposure of misgovernment or maladministration does not damage the credit of the country. Quite the reverse. It instead affords proof to outsiders that a healthy public opinion exists which can bo relied on to act as a check on a bad Government. It is not the damage to the credit of the country that these Ministerialists fear, but the damage to the credit of the Administration they support. It is a confession of weakness on their part that they have to resort to these tactics and endeavour to confuse the Government with the_ State. If .they could answer the criticism directed at the Ward Administration they n'ould quickly do so. As they cannot disprove'the statements made, they :lrag out this weather-worn bogey of .heirs and shed crocodilo tears over Lhc iniquities of their opponents. It is a poor method of fighting—shelving a bad cause behind the plea of natriotism. Still their cause is really iiich a very bad one that it must be cry difficult for them at times to find iny sort of shelter for it. The distressing Artillery fatality of Saturday has come and gone, and it is exceedingly regrettable thatmore efficient steps were not taken to probe the matter a- little more with a view to clearing up one or two points of more than passing concern. Service with field artillery is not without its clement of risk, and the artillery regulations—built up as the result of long experience in England —are not to be broken through without greatly increasing that risk. One of the rules distinctly provides that no member of the gun detachment must dismount from gun or limber while the battery is in motion. That rule seems to have been broken by the unfortunate young man who met his death as a result. It appears that his cap blew off, he left his position to secure it, and in returning to his place on the , gun he met his death. It was in the power of any of the various officers riding on the flank to have stopped the battery as soon as deceased s cap blew off, or to have prevented hini remounting while the battery was in motion, but that was not done. It was certainly the business of one or more of these officers to have noticed the occurrence and to have stopped the battery before deceased attempted to regain his.position on the gun. But this also was not done. This last point should assuredly have been brought up at the inquest, but there is no trace of it in the record of the proceedings. Soldiering is not play, and unless a proper discipline is enforced there will always be risk of accidents.