The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, JUNE 1, 1870.

Evening Star, Volume VIII, Issue 2205, 1 June 1870, Page 2

The Evening Star WEDNESDAY, JUNE 1, 1870.

If Mr Thomson has few Statesmanlike gifts to boast of, he possesses that of pertinacity. His motion is a curiosity in its way—ingenious, and not very complimentary to the gudgeons it is intended to catch. Perhaps there was {scarcely ever a more Jesuitical motion placed on the Notice Paper. It lays itself out for the support of the Clodocrats and the Opposition, It is so framed that it is almost impossible to deny at least one of its alternatives, and therefore, if it were to be treated according to its letter instead of its spirit, it would probably be affirmed. This wily motion is as follows : —•

That, as the Government were kept in office last session, either by a promise which they have broken, or by a misapprehension on the part of several of their supporters, the only honorable course open to them is to over the reins of Government to the party then known as the Opposition. While we believe the first part of the affirmation to be utterly false, we are quite prepared to accept the second. We are not aware of any promise made by the Executive such as is here insinuated ; neither does this crawling resolution affirm it. It only says, if the Government did make no such propjise, some of those who supported

them believed they did. We have not the slightest doubt of the “ misappve- “ hension on the part of several of “ their supporters.” The surprise would be if such men as followed blindly in Mr Thomson’s lead apprehended clearly what they were doing. It is evident that, through pure want of a straightforward policy, he himself has got entangled in a mesh from which he ought not to be allowed to escape. What could be more crooked than to vote foi land resolutions he did not appiovc . if he did not approve of them 1 Did he really suppose that a Ministry could bring forward a string of resolutions, ask the House to affirm them, receive support enough to carry them, and the very next session submit to have them pulled in pieces by the very men who voted for them, just because those men had been brought to book by their clodocratic constituents'? If the Executive weie such tools in the hands of their supporters as to be played with in that way, it would be as fortunate for the country to be rid of them as it would be unfortunate to hand over the reins of Government to the party Mr Thomson represents. We can easily imagine that lie will not be without supporters. There are plenty of his own style of thinking in the Council—men who are quite willing by the vote they are prepaied to give, to say—“ We did not understand “ what we were doing.” Now to our minds it would be something like candid if they would only go in a like straightforward way to the hustings, and tell their constituents so. There might then be a chance of a better class of representatives being chosen for the Provincial Council. But the very confession is a warning not to place ■ such men in power. Mr Thomson may say that hj« asks “ the reins of u government to be handed over to the “ party then (that is, last session) “ known as the Opposition.” But who does he mean by it 1 Does he really mean the party who opposed the Government last session 1 If so, what is to be the gain to his clodocrats 1 That party can with a safe conscience affirm by their votes that they believe the Government was supported by many through misapprehension, and in their hands we believe the honor of the Province would be equally safe, and its affairs equally well conducted as by the present Ministry. But these, we apprehend, are not the opponents Mr Thomson means. They are men of a different stamp—followers in his own tortuous course —men who see no harm in voting for what they confess they do not approve, under the delusion that they have tools to deal with who at their bidding will undo what they have helped them to enact Clutha settlers who can appeal from the Provincial to the General Government, and then sit in condemnation on thenown work, and charge it ujion other people. We do not anticipate that Mr Thomson can succeed in his design of unseating the present Ministry on such frivolous grounds. If he could establish his first assumption—“ That as “ the Government were kept in office “ last session by a promise which they “ have broken ” —it would have been a sufficient reason for a direct vote of want of confidenc in them. Under such an imputation, if affirmed by the Council, no Executive would consent to retain office. But it is not a sufficient reason for their resigning that their supporters acted under “ a rais- - “ apprehension.” Their duty was to see their way clearly.; to 'Understand what they were doing ; and if they . did not—if they allowed themselves to be bamboozled into a course that afterreflection led them to condemn —it may be a x-eason for their.constituents rejecting their services at the next election, but certainly not for t \u> resignation of the Government, Clearly those who are asked to support the motion have a right to know whether Mr Thomson, as the mover of the resolution, expects to be invited to form a Ministry, should it be carried. On his own showing he has been guilty of the very offence he charges upon the Ministry, for he has on more than one occasion stated he voted for measures that he did not approve —that is, ho said “ Yes,” but meant “ No.” A schoolboy would easily find an epithet for such a course of action, and we ask is it one calculated to inspire confidence 1 [Since the above was written, Mr Thomson allowed his motion to lapse.]