The Dominion. TUESDAY, MAY 14, 1912. AN ABUSE OF AUTHORITY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1439, 14 May 1912, Page 4

The Dominion. TUESDAY, MAY 14, 1912. AN ABUSE OF AUTHORITY.

The curiously mixed Mackenzie ~( Cabinet becomes odder and odder as f ( time passes. Led by the representativc of one quarter of the House of Representatives, unpossessed ot the n confidence of a majority of the House, S( unapproved by the country, certain of an early 'defeat, devoid of any policy save a determination to repudiate the wild programme which it t| accepted as part of its tricky wriggle y into office, it is yet actually proceed- j, ing to commit the country to lmportant and expensive political pro- „ jects as if it were a powerful, popu- t lar, and trusted Ministry. . It was 0 hinted the other day that this strange n collection of politicians might _ ap- j, point a Commission to investigate (- •railway policy. The Minister for a Education has definitely stated that j. a Royal Commission on Education s would be set up. And we learn to-. 0 day from the Prime Minister that a (- Royal Commission is to be appointed g to overhaul the. Civil Service. Per- r haps wc should feel gratification at a this wholesale surrender of "Liberal- T ism" to the steady demand of the ffriends of reform for a cleaning-uj) s of the Augean stable of "Liberar v administration. And of course it is c gratifying in a sense. But the satis- f faction ot the friends of reform will ] be largely tempered by the reflection s that the cause of honest government s has made this notable advance only r through the fact that there is in office an accidental Ministry so desperately placed as to be unable to resist any - longer the popular demand for in- - vestigation and reform. Truth, in the broad political sense, has not here ) won by its own weight, but by the weakness and cowardice of its J ,s enemies. f Although we cannot recall that any f member of the' Ministry had a good i >k word to say, prior to December last, ( -n for those who, urged the need for re- J re form in the railways and in the Civil ( Service, we have a lively recollection , [S of innumerable fierce and venomous iff assaults upon the friends of reform , ►a by Messrs. Mackenzie, Laurenson, , in Hanan, Russell, and Ell. . During i the last Parliament there was not one : lc j of these five Ministers who would not, ; ik or did not, run into pages of Ilniii(l surd in defending the "Liberal" Ad- • ministration against the suggestion that improvement was urgently necesDid they express their honest convictions then 1 Are they to be trusted now'! The public will draw its own conclusion ;~it probably long 92 ago drew the conclusion, from the numerous references by Ministers to ~ the need for cleaner and better administration and from the almost equally numerous demands for reform that have come from the "Liberal" press, that all these years the eh "Liberals" in Parliament have been fooling the country. The friends of or reform can, ns we have said, take >s- some satisfaction from the Ministry s •t» virtual admission of a large part of the reform case. No sensible person, " however, expects that any real reform in administration could come from a collection of men who for some years were Slit Joseph Wand's most vigorous backers in the fifht. *<!inst 1:1'* reform idea. Still, they have admilted, under the compulsion of cirY cunistanee, that reform is after all ' necessary; and that is a fact which, v having gone on record, will remain on record. The Mackenzie Ministry apparently is so constituted that, if it (.bought, as it apparently dors think, that to make a pretence, or even a real beginning, of reform, would lengthen its days by ever so little, it would cheerfully adopt the whole iie-r-e' form programme. Its hopes of a career are qnif'e. vain; but, for 'pn u fiogls who .voted Rsionfl last Decern-,!

ber the great fact is that even this curiously assorted Ministry, whatever it may say about the lieform movement, has by its acts shown clearly its recognition of the fact that the 15eform movement is irresistible. But we feel bound to protest against the action of the Ministry in setting up Royal Commissions at all. 11l the first place, it is not in a position to perform such acts, which are distinctly not matters of routine. I The other day we quoted some precedents which showed clearly that a regard for constitutional practice j would restrain a Ministry which has neither a majority nor any instructions from the country for performing any but necessary and simple acts of administration. _ What the Ministry is proposing is a number of highly important and obviously extra-ordinary acts. But the constitutional aspect of the matter is not the only aspect from which the appointment of these Royal. Commissions shows up as highly 'objectionable. The Mackenzie Ministry will not be in existence to deal with such reports as any It-oval Commission may make. It is therefore acting arbitrarily without responsibility, i Again, there is no guarantee that the personurl of the Commissions will command any greater public confidence than the personnel of the Ministry itself. At Balclutha, it is worth noting, the Prime Minister indicated 'that the lloyal Commission on the Civil Scrvicc would consist of "the ablest business man, the ablest accountant, and the ablest banker" in the country. Mn. Mackenzie knows more than anyone if he knows_ who these gentlemen are. But even i£ his omniscience were equal 'to his impotence at the present time to do anything but enact_ arbitrary edicts, he would not be acting properly in asking the Governor to sanction such an attack upon constitutional principles. as ho and his colleagues have apparently decided upon.