The Dominion. FRIDAY, MARCH 1, 1912. DEMOCRACY & " LIBERALISM."

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1377, 1 March 1912, Page 4

The Dominion. FRIDAY, MARCH 1, 1912. DEMOCRACY & " LIBERALISM."

The attitude adopted by the Piume Minister in the House of Representatives yesterday on the question of adjournment is a fair sample of how far the Government really trusts the people or considers,their interests. fie proposed, without giving any indication whatever to Parliament or the country as to his future intentions, to prorogue Parliament until June, knowing full well that in the interim a new Government about which the people know nothing would take up the reins of office and administer the affairs of the Dominion regardless of whether or not it possessed the confidence of the country. Sir Joseph Ward may desire to ignore the fact, but his Government does not possess the confidence of either Parliament or the country. If it did the Ministry would not have been forced into the position of having to resign, as it intends to do. The vote by which the Government so narrowly escaped ejection from office was given on condition that Sir Joseph Ward resigned, and his resignation of course carries with it the resignations of all the other members of the Cabinet. The position, therefore, is this: that a discredited Government, pledged to hand in its resignation, desires that Parliament should adjourn in order that Sir Joseph "Ward may advise his Excellency the Governor to send for someone to form a new Government to take its place and control the affairs of _ the country without Parliament being given an opportunity of even knowing the names of the men who are to pe entrusted with this great responsibility. Neither Parliament nor the country has the" faintest idea who will constitute the new Government. Sir, Joseph Ward might, if it suited him, advise his Excellency to send for Mn. Glover, and Mr. Glover might form a Ministry composed of the most inexperienced members of the House, and for three or four months this Government would have the absolute control of the country's affairs, and Parliament would be helpless to interfere until June next. It might suit the purpose of the Prime Minister to recommend as his successor a weak man in order that he might bo able to bend him to his will, or in order-that a further early change may be assured. We do not say that Sir Joseph Ward proposes to do this, but his procedure would create a situation which would render tills possible. It is a mostextraordinary thing that any Go--eminent in a country such as this is should, in its dying hours, attempt in this way to brush aside the principles of democratic- government, and place in office as its successors a set of men whose policy is_ absolutely unknown, and whose ability to command a majority is to all appearances quite as reniots as that of the men now forced to abdicate by. a hostile public opinion. The impropriety of the proposed ■ procedure is, of course, aggravated by the fact that Parliament was specially summoned to test the question of whether any party was in a position to carry <>' the. Government of (he country, and also by the circumstance that members are still here for that purpose. The proper course—the only course which a truly democratic Government could take in such circumstanrcs—

would have been to have, givon members au opportunity before dispersing of learning the personnel of the new Government and to afford that Government a chance of placing a general ontlino of its policy before the country. The new Government may be anything; it may do anything; no one can tell. Parliament and the public arc asked to take it absolutely 05 trust at a most critical time 111 tho country's affairs. There is not a soundly conducted business establishment in the Dominion that would dare to run its business on such, preposterous lines, and yet Mo large, and in some cases vitally important, interests involved in the government of the country, are to be treated in this reckless and undemocratic fashion. There is not the least doubt that a reasonable adjournment as proposed by the Reform party would cwr.uiend itself to the general public, as the proper course to- pursue, and neither the Government nor the Labour members can find any good excuse to put forward against it._ At time of writing the matter is still under discussion, and the outcome is open to doubt; but whatever the result of the division may be, the improper attempt of the Ministerialists to squeeze in a new Ministry on trust in the manner proposed must damage the credit of the party still further in fhe eyes of the country.