NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1382, 7 March 1912, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

Perhaps the funniest bit of recent political arithmetic is that of the Auckland Star, which calculates that the "Liberal and. Labour party" has "a clear majority of four, including the Speaker's casting vote." AVc suppose nobody else but the (S7<v/mathematician is unaware that so long as there is a majority at all the. casting vote cannot ha used. The Star also includes, like other calculators, Mn. Wilfokd's vote. But is not this rather unfair to Mn. Wilfobd? He has not always done as his party leaders have bidden Kim. AVe remember his protest against the expenditure on the entertainment of the American Fleet, his determined and protracted Governmental attacks upon the rights of the city of which he is Mayor, and that still more striking example of independence when he declared in the House that if the "Gag Clause" of the Second Ballot Act became law he would be prepared to set it at defiance by addressing the electors every day of the prohibited period. And this is the man who is expected to adhere through thick and thin to a Cabinet which was never thought o< when ho was elected, and which will owe its existence to the breaking of pledges and denial of the spirit of constitutional government. We are not in Mr. Wilford's confidence, but we do not like to hear him spoken_ ill of when he is not here to defend himself.

The Government—or, rather, the temporary executive of "Liberalism," for it is not the Executive of the nation—is heaping up odium and embarrassment for itself and its friends by its failure to commit its fortunes to the course of constitutionality and honour. It is being asked why it has not appointed the New Zealand representative on the imperial Trade Commission resolved upon by the Imperial last year. It is also being _ asked what is to be done about filling the post that Sir AVilmam Hall-Jones is to vacate on March 31. Everybody feels—and even leading Ministerialist organs have admitted—that the Government is not in a position to exercise its power of appointment in respect of any important office. What is the Government going to do 1 It has made no sign respecting the two posts already mentioned, but it has made another apoointment of firstrate importance. Mr. D. J. Nathan's elevation to the Chairmanship of the Bank of New Zealand will astonish and displease the public. There was no occasion for haste over this appointment, and until, and unless, Mr. Harold Beauchamp on his return to New Zealand explains that he desired to be relieved of his responsibilities, many people will suspect that Mr. Nathan s appointment is the concrete expression of the Government's disapproval of Mn. Beauciiamp's plain-speaking in his semi-annual addresses on the financial outlook. For the public has not forgotten that Mr. Beauciiamp was attacked both by the Prime Minister and the Hon. T. Mackenzie. It may be, of course, that Mr. Beauchamp did not desire rcappointmont. But the incident illustrates the disadvantages, to put it mildly, of the Government's desperate refusal to avoid what every good interest in the country needs, namely, a political settlement of a lasting and stable character. The Government has hampered public business, and has created tho position that no Executive act of any importance can help arousing public disapproval or public doubt. That is tho position the Government has created, and it is clearly a position that is not desirable.

The latest "Suffragist" raid lias dealt a very heavy blow to thn cause on behalf of which it wnn arranged. Even the Daily JWws, we are told today, has abandoned its rule of apologist, and lies felt constrained to declare that, ''the Government cannot longer permit society to lie disorganised l).v a few outlaws who liavi , declared war on I lit; social order.' . The Xcir.i adds that "recent events have destroyed ihi'ir iiuise. in Parliament''—a significant supplement, in view of the Xcwx'x position, to yesterday's report that ''the consensus of opinion amongst, members of the House of Commons is thai", the. recent actions of I he militant Suffragettes has killed the Concilintion Bill," MISS CIIPISTABEt, PANKHUHST i? Hirtwtenine that "the women "would terrorise the whole of the male com-

niunity," and Mils. _ Pethick LawliEXOT.'is saying Hint, in order to save its windows the public will surrpii-de-r. But notliing is more certain Mian'that the community/ will refuse to be coerced. There is a striking resemblance between the action of the Suffragists and the action of the Syndicalists. We should not like to dogmatise about it, but we fancy that ■when a full analysis of the causes and methods of both these militant movements is made, it will h= established that that must be a bad cause which can express itself only by a minority assault upon the social order. The unhappy fact is that the Suffragists and Syndicalists are quite unable to realise this.