THE POLITICAL CRISIS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXV, Issue 2179, 7 September 1907, Page 2

THE POLITICAL CRISIS.

REBELLIOUS MEMBERS BROUGHT TU HEEL. N.Z. TIMES TAKES UP THE CUDGELS ON BEHALF OF SIR JOSEPH WARD. THE PREAIIER MAKES A STATEMENT. (Spooial to Times.)

WELLINGTON, September G. All tlio talk in political circles is still about tlio crisis over tlio tariff, and tho subsequent and even, more extraordinary and interesting developments. indeed the events of tlio last few days are probably unique in the Parliamentary history of tho colony. Whatever mav be said to tho contrary, they began by a movement in which certain members of the Government xxarty anil the Opposition, representing constituencies . in the milling and dairying districts, conspired to do away with tlie duty on mining and dairying machinery. Tho result was tho defeat of the Government on one of their tariff proposals. On Wednesday night tho proceedings ended dramatically by a vehement denunciation by tlio Premier land the temporary abandonment of tho Tariff Bill. This suddou and unexpected development caused somewhat of a political sensation, ami there was much speculation as to what would follow. There were hints of a dissolution, and some color was given to such a lino of action by tho appearance yesterday of an unexpected Bill dealing with the taking of licensing polls. The older Parliamentary bauds, however, came to the conclusion that the Government was only bluffing, and that was tho view put forward in my telegrams on Wednesday and Thursday. The Premier adopted a stand-off policy, leaving tho rebels to their own devices, in the hope, no doubt, that they would come to bool. No caucus was called. They woro absolutely ignored, ami their fellow-unembers said they were , feeling somewhat miserable.

AN EXTRAORDINARY ARTICLE. This morning fuel was added to tho flames in the shape of an extraordinary article in tlio .lending columns of tho Ministerial morning journal, condemnatory <*f the Government members who had reversed their votes, of Mr. Herries, and even of tlie Hon. the Speaker himself. Not only that, but the “Times” gave a- black-letter list (in special tvpe) of tlio names of those who reversed thenvote given in Committee of Ways anil Aleans, and also of those members of tho Government party who, being m tlie precincts, did not record their votes on Wednesday night, viz., Alessrs. Fiatonau, Graham, "and Hogan. Such an unusually severe condemnation of Government supporters in the columns of a Government newspaper was almost unique in N.Z. journalism, and very naturally under tho circumstances it was thought to bo inspired. The article, which is entitled “Questionable Conduct,” begins with the surmise that there. is more than meets the eye in the introduction of the Licensing Polls Bill, and after brief explanation of the measure it proceeds to sav: . “Its introduction at this particular juncture has an ominous significance, none the less marked because of the dignified silence hitherto observed by the head of the Government on the incident of Wednesday night, which reflects so much discredit on certain members who had so far professed loyalty to the Government. Nothing during the present session lias politically given m greater satisfaction than the attitude of the Premier on an occasion which was calculated to ruffle even a temper so well held in hand as that of Sir Joseph Ward. We consider that the Premier would have been wanting to liis own dignity and to till dignity and responsibility of his office if ho had not administered a stern rebuke to the traitors of bis own camp. To say that he had not his temper in .perfect control is not true. So far was" he from lacking the proper deliberation that he allowed a considerable intorval to elapse before ho characterised, in.language certainly not too strong, a piece of party treachery which was vile, looked, at from any ono of its several sides.”

Referring to those •members of the Government party who reversed their vote the article proceeds:—“Not merely did those members individually go luck on their vote given in Committee of Ways and Means, but they carried on behind tlio Premier’s back a propaganda of persuasion and seduction, tlio only objeot of which can have been and was to uut an affront on the political chief to whom they owed at least the loyalty of ordinary honesty; but even this caballing and intriguing, despicable as it is in itself, does not measure the full amount of tho treachery. Not 0011tent with inciting each other to take tlieir chief on the flank when lie least expected it, when they had in effect lulled his suspicions to rest by their vote in Committee of Ways and Aleans, some of the members certain ly went so far as to intrigue and join forces with the Opposition; and with which member of tlie Opposition in particular? Well, wo are lutlier ashamed to answer this question, but as a matter ef fact it was with that particular member of the Opposition who a few nights before had insulted their chief over a pardonable mistake made b.v him, and readily acknowledged in a way that one gentleman does not usually insult another under any provocation whatsoever. Wo arc quite sure that Air. Herries regrets the words he used to Sir Joseph Ward on the occasion wo refer to —

words which, coming from him, filled those who know him with astonishment. Nevertheless, lie did use thorn, and ho used them in the presence of those very supporters of the Government who a few days later entered into a compact with the member for the Bay of Plenty to administer a blow to their chief—a blow which, as far as they were concerned, was a blow below the belt of the most treacherous kind. Those members who covered themselves with e-lory by voting for the Government in Committee of Ways and Means, and without hint or warning voting against the Government a week later, deservo to have their names handed down to posterity, and as far as our ephemeral efforts cun do it the thing shall hi done. They were: .Messrs. Dillon. Field, Hall, Hornsby, Jennings, and Itoss. What opinion do these gentlemen suppose will ho entertained of them by those members of the Opposition to whom they lent themselves out so roadilv as catspaws? Pretty much tlie same opinion, we should suppose, as that held by the Government —a feeling of supreme contempt ; hut these six members liad at least a certain courage—that we will say for them. It requires some courage to execute in the full face of Parliament a volte face such as theirs; and this courage, they possessed, and in effect beneath this lowest deep there is yet a lower dee)). Three 11101111161-8 (Messrs. Flatiiian, Graham, and Hogan) by discreetly absenting themselves when the division took place avoided the difficulty and danger of the acrobatic performance so nimbly executed by the gentlemen of their kidney, upon which commendable discretion there has - been much interesting comment in the lobbies. As regards die attitude

or roe .-spcaiver on uiis interesting occasion, wo speak with some diffidence. No 011 c would venture to throw any doubt on the impartiality of the jn'esent Speaker, but we must be allowed to say tliajt a Speaker who finds himself 011 the floor of the House and engages in active lobbying places himself in wliat’ we cannot help regarding as a “f alse and extremely undesirable position. A Speaker, according to our way of thinking, occupies a position as strictly judicial as that of a Judge of the Supreme Court, and lie departs from it at his peril. He is supposed to hold the political balance evenly between the two parties, and how can he do this if he is a. partisan, for this or that . measure? Even a Speaker .cannot divest himself of political opinions. This it would be unreasonable to expect, hut at least his political opia-

ions ought never to appear in < deuce. 'JMiis lias long been tlie tradition of tlio .House of Commons, a •! it is also the principle acted upon aWashington. To come nearer home, the present Speaker's distinguished ]i redeeessor, Sir .Maurice O'Rorko, observed the strictest neutrality in politics. So also did Sir W. J. Steward. Wo do not suppose that Sir .Joseph Ward is much disturbed by the late untoward incident. Certainly he has no need to he. From the point of view"of the Government the incident lias at least this great advantage, that it lias unmasked the untrustworthy among their friends. If these members do not recognise their obligations to the Government, if they consider tlia-t they were returned under pledge to sujiport a mm and not a Liboral policy, tlio sooner they are afforded an opportunity of consulting their constituencies again the better. Sir Joseph Ward has no need to fear an appeal to the country. We are not prepared to may as much for the members who have so recently distinguished themselves, and who hive yet to learn the merest elements of party loyalty. The fact is that these gentlemen have made a mistake which is apt to be made by r,hallow natures. Sir J. Ward’s conduct during his period of office has been very markedly characterised by a certaih moderation and urbanity which are the natural outcome of a kindly and courteous nature. By the lengths to which those members whose conduct wo have been discussing have permitted themselves to go wo should say that they have grievously misinterpreted these traits in Sir Joseph s character.”

THE '‘REBELS” MEET. The members referred- to in. this article were very naturally much concerned about Buch criticisms of their actions, and a number of them mec tliis morning and discussed the position. It was resolved to wait upon the Premier, and during tlie morning the interview duly took place. The members most interested were somewhat reticent about the details oi their conversation with the Premier, but the latter it was stated was ‘ ‘completely satisfied with the explanations made,” and also “satisfied that no arrangement had been entered into.

PROCEEDINGS IN THE HOUSE

A STATEMENT BY THE PREMIER

During tlio forenoon it was bruited about that the Premier would make a statement to the House, and members attended in full force to hear it. As soon as tho formal business was disposed of, Sir Joseph -Ward rose m his place and said that a number oi the members referred to in the New Zealand Times article had seen him. At the outset he said he would like to make it clear that no member of the Government was responsible for that article. (Hear, hear.) He understood there was an impression that some member of the Administration (his colleague in the Upper House had been mentioned) had inspired the article. He had taken an opportunity of seeing Dr. Findlay and the latter had assured him that lie neither originated lior saw the article in question, nor had any other member of the Administration. He wanted also to say, what was possibly known to some lion, members, that one or two of the Ministry had an interest in tho New Zealand Times. Mr. Massey: Wliat is that? Sir Joseph Ward repeated tlie statement, but added that they had not a controlling interest, nor was any member of the Government a director. He went on to say that what took place on Wednesday was responsible for an article of very great severity in the paper, but he did not endorse that article. _ (Hear, hear.) Personally he had received the assurance of tho six members that there

was no compact with the mover of the amendment, and he accepted the statement unreservedly. If there had been such a compact with the Opposition as was suggested the Government would have been put into a false position, and ho had made up his mind that he would not carry on ; but he was now satisfied that there was no such arrangement, and he had no fault to find, with his friends on bis side of the House. Those remarks also applied to those member: who did not vote. He was satisfied that their abstention .was perfectly legitimate and not tho result of any compact ..as he at first believed. As to Wednesday niglit' lie did not object

to members voting as they liked, but the Government ought to know whether it was likely to be able to carry out its tariff policy generally without . material alteration .The arrangement of compacts between sections of both sides of the House would result in alterations which would make -the tariff not that of the Government, and that was a position which the Government could not accept. As to the Speaker, he had always acted with the strictest impartiality, but he had a “perfect right in committee to exercise his right as a member as be thought fit-. Mr. Greenslade explained that an interjection lie had made on Wednesday night had been somewhat misunderstood, viz., as to his having told the Senior Whip all about it. What he meant to convey was that he had told the Government Whip it would be a, very close division, but he did not convey to him that a compact had been formed between a few members of the House interested in the dairying and mining industries. So far as the other Government Whip (Mr. Colvin) was concerned, lie was with his (the speaker’s) party and had voted against the Government. Mr. Graham expressed satisfaction with the Premier’s statement. He had been in the company of a relative and did not get back to the House in time for the division. Had he been present 110 would have voted with the Government as he had done in committee of Ways and Means.

While Mr. Graham was making lib explanation Air. McLuelilan, the member for Ashburton, made one or two exclamations. Mr. Graham said 110 *’ hoped the member for Ashburton would keep quiet. Mr. McLachlan: Who could doubt your courage? (Daughter.) Mr. Graham concluded his explanation by stating that lie got hack to Parliament House just as th e lobby doors were being locked for the division.

Mr. McLaehlan then arose in all his might from :i recumbent position. He said : I would not liavo risen at all had not the lion, member for Nelson mentioned my namo in the House. He said that he was excluded, and that he was with souk near friends who had come to 'Wellington. Ido not wish to bring in his personal relationship with any of his dear friends, not at all, but lie is an oracle, and when 110 speaks let no dog bark. (Daughter.) That’s John Graham, of Nelson. The Speaker: The lion, member must not address members by their Christian or their surnames. Air. AlcDachlan : Very well, then — the 11011. member for Nelson —will that do? Why should lie have mentioned my name? Why should he bring me into this controversy? 1 neither voted nor abstained from voting. (Aluch laughter.) Air. Graham: He interrupted me while I was speaking, and I asked -him to remain silent. Air. AlcDachlan : It would be a good thing if you remained silent also. Ha ! ha ! If the lion, member for Nelson would remain, silent it would tend to the harmony of this Hpuse: but 1 have no objection. He -

personal and esteemed friend of min: . (Daughter.) Air. Graham: I’m sorry. Air. Flatinan was the next speaker who rose to make his explanation. He said he did walk out of tile Chamber for reasons that it was unnecessary to give at the present moment. He had asked the Whip for a pair, hut 110 did not think one was available. He could not cet back in time before the doors were locked. Air. AlcDachlan: Too much hedging. Air. Hogan was pleased to hear the Premier’s statement that the article was not inspired. Ho had never yet dodged a division, and never would. He was unavoidably absent from the

T'r.iic. He could not concede to the Premier, however, that tho tariff was •• ;'u tv question. If so then a sbate- . ■!■ should have been made to that cu’lc:, and amendments treated as want of confidence motions. He would like tlio Premier to state tho position, what, for instance, would happen when the duty on flour cumo to be considered. lie did not want to bo placed in a false position. Mr. Hornsby referred to “the unworthy slur cast upon some of bus brother members.” He proceeded to pour out th© vials of his wrath upon the N.Z. Times. As one who had occupied the editorial ohair of that paper lie said he would think little of those of the profession he belonged to if lie thought there were many men in this colony on tho press of New Zealand who could get down to the deepest depths of degradation and crawlsomeness that was mannested in tho article referred to. (Government “hear, hears.”) If, as the paper hinted, there was to be a dissolution he for onp would welcome it. Mr. McLaclilan : So do I, so do 1.

Mr. Jennings said tho article was utterly unfair, and filled with vindictiveness. It was boyond his power to express strongly and-sufficiently the feeling he had in regard to it; and then ho added: “I could pick who wrote that article.” An lion, member: “What’s your jiick?” ... Mr. Jennings: I treat it with utter contempt and disdain. Sir Joseph Ward explained that he had never said the tariff was a par-tv question. He had said it was not, and members were entitled to vot 0 as they thought proper on any item of the tariff. A combination among members was an ontirely different thing, and one could only judge when the;outcome of it took place. He declined to be held responsible for anv article tbit appeared in the N.Z. Times. It was true that members of the Government had shares in that

paper, but'they held them in their private capacity. He had not attempted to interfere with anyone conducting the literary side of tlie paper, and ho was not going to do so.