THE SECOND BALLOT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2298, 17 September 1908, Page 3

THE SECOND BALLOT.

THE “GAG” CLAUSE. (Special to “Times.”) WELLINGTON. Sept. 16. The local newspapers, including the Ministerial journal, continue to bo verv severe upon the Government regarding the attitude of the Government on this Bill. In an article this morning the “N.Z. Times” points outthat tho “gag” clause has failed in connection with the gambling evil, and shows that notwithstanding tlio suppression of news about betting in the newspapers betting lias actually increased since the Act was passed. The “Times” gives tho figures to prove its statement. “The gambling evil,” it adds, “flourishes most where it is unseen, and the curtailment of the liberties of the press in this respect, as in others, can onlv result in serious harm to the community.” To-night’s “Post”- deals with the subject in trenchant form. “The Upper House,” it says, “has proved a broken reed. What secret motive, or what backstairs intrigue, has induced a Government of professed democrats to consent to proposals so undemocratic and tyrannical as the “gag” clauses of this Bill is a matter for conjecture, on which they may expect to hear a good deal during that period of the electoral campaign when speakers and writers will still bo permitted to enjoy the elementary rights of free men. It may also be hoped that, despite the muzzling of candidates, and the spiking of the guns of the press in the interval botiPeen the two polls, the freedom of the- country may assert itself against the cqorcionists -in a manner worthy of the past sacrifices by which that freedom was won. Never surely was the. At torn oy-G oil era 1’ s professional skill, in proving the worst to be the better reason, more hopelessly cornered, than it was in yesterday’s debate. All liis subtlety was unequal to tho task of devising a single argument for applying tlio gag and the muzzle to tlio second ballot, which would not have, equally justified tho aniilication of the same Russian methods to the first. Possibly tho slfam Liberalism of Dr. Findlay and In’s colleagues, which has resulted in the evolution of tin’s deplorable monstrosity, will in duo course bo carried to its logical conclusion of all-round tyranny. Where else should their present rant about equalising the conditions of the two candidates, one wjth wealth and friends', tho other with none, lead them.” “We 'trust,” concludes tho “Post,” “that there will bo enough sense and enough manhood left m tho electors to enable them to teach a much-needed lesson to the Ministers who have so shamefully abused their trust.”