THE WRETCHED PAST.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1746, 10 May 1913, Page 4

THE WRETCHED PAST.

The little circle of claquers who are striving, somewhat unsuccessfully, it must be confessed, to din it into the ears of the multitude that the country desires a return to Wardisji received a cold douche a day or two ago from the Southland Times. The Southland journal, in discussing the Liberal leadership, was unkind enoitgh to remark that the member for Awarna might well hesitate to resume command of a party "which callously deserted hira at tho first hint of disaster." The claquers were much upset at this unpleasant reminder. It is quite true, of course, that Sir Joseph Ward's leadership was largely responsible for tho disaster which overtook the party, and it is equally true that many members of the party, recognising this, felt that his retirement was tho one and only hope of the party being able to carry on. But it is extremely distasteful to these same people, _ now that- the party, under the guidance of those who succeeded Sir Joseph Ward has sunk still lower in popular esteem, to have the unhappy past thrown in their faces in this way. Driven to the extremity of having to fall back on tho member for Awarua ns their leader, they naturally desire to forget, and to let the public forget, that they ever doubted his capacity to lead them successfully and to restore public confidence in Wardism. Tho Anti-lWorm journal in Chrislchureli, it is not surprising to find, is quite angry with (lie Southland Tims for reminding the "Liberal" Parliamentarians of llieir past distrust of Sn: Joseph Ward's leadership. and particularly it is annoyed at the reflection on their loyally. While it is easy to understand the anxiety of the Christchureh journal lo discount the facts of the position, H.j nnflcavom 1 Ui rjrpliiti ttwriy gjp Joseph Wabd's re&iKiiatiovi is siugu-

larly lame and unconvincing. The memory of the public, we have no doubt, is sufficiently long to enable it to recall that it was necessary for .Sir Josupii Ward to intimate his intention to resign the leadership of the party in order to escape a straight-out defeat on the want-of-cunliuence motion then before the House. As it was, the motion even then was rejected by only one vote. Tho matter now is, of oourse, not one of any moment. The party made such ,1 sad bungle of things after Sin Joseph Ward's retirement from the leadership that when the Mackenzie Government was defeated they again turned to him, but for the time being at least lie had had enough of tlicm. Now, apparently, finding the rest of the material in their ranks too poor to produce any sort of a leader at all, they arc about to offer the post to the member for Awarua. To-day, even his hereditary title is no bar to their loyalty and devotion. Possibly they imagine that it may prove a bait to tempt the Labour Party—tho self-styled Social-Dcmocrats—to set aside their aspirations, about which we have heard so much, and range themselves under the banner of Wardism.