THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1879.

Globe, Volume XXI, Issue 1755, 4 October 1879, Page 2

THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1879.

The Grey Ministry has fallen. Tho country to which Sir George Grey appealed has given in its verdict. The Ministry has heen weighed in the balance and found wanting. And naturally so. The gross incapacity which it has displayed in the conduct of public affairs during its period of office, has thoroughly disgusted all those who think that the science of Government is not completely composed of the utterance of high sounding phrases and general maxims culled from the works of celebrated writers. It was said of the poet Goldsmith that " he wrote like an angel and talked like poor poll." Of the Grey Ministry it might well be said " that it talked like an angel and acted like poor poll." Its adherents cannot complain that it has not had a fair trial. But as time passed on, Ministerial shortcomings became more and more glaring, and it was felt that, sooner or later, the natural consequences of its want of executive ability were certain to eventuate. The courso which it pursued during the late elections certainly did not raise its general character. In fact the charges brought against tho Government were of such a nature that if they could not be refuted, it was hopeless to imagine that it could long survive. Tho charges were not refuted, and the Ministry has fallen. The Grey section of the Press will naturally express extreme surprise at the fall of their party. Greyites at large will be invited to bide their time. The opposite party will be accused of stealing liberal ideas from the Knight of Kawau, and so on. All this is of course to be expected. But tho country at large will be perfectly easy. The views held by the bulk of the Anti-Greyites are well known. There is no doubt of their thoroughly liberal character. Constituencies may rest assured that the opponents of the Grey Government are influenced by no anti-liberal motives. They have risen against utter administrative incapacity. That and that alone was the true question brought before the country during the late elections. And the country has recognised tho real bearing of the issue, and has given its verdict accordingly.

The discussion on Thursday last at the meeting of the Harbour Board on the subject of the promised gratuities to the crew of the tug steamer, reveals a peculiar state of things. As will be remembered the colony was in June last visited by a very severe gale. At that time Lyttelton harbour outside the wharves was pretty full of shipping, and many of the vessels were in great danger during the day, and wore only saved from destruction by the services of the tug. Some of the representativea of the underwriters who were saved from paying largo insurances, in the exuberance of their joy told the chairman of the Harbor Board that the companies interested would recogniso the extraordinary exertions made by the officers and crew of the tug. Acting undor this promise the chairman officially mentioned it to the Board, and a resolution was carried to enable the employees to receive the gratuity. Following on this, and influenced by the promise no doubt, the Board agreed to charge the vessels thus saved only tho ordinary rates of tonnage. As some months elapsed, and no sign was made by the companies, the Harbor Board communicated with the Underwriters' Association, and then came the very extraordinary letter road at the last meeting of tho Board. In this tho Association inform the Board that, having considered tho subject, they are unable to give any gratuity. It seems remarkablo to say tho least of it that gentlemen should on behalf of a body, and of their own free will and accord, make a promise to mark their souse of services rendered, and then should coolly repudiate it some few months afterwards. It must be remembered also, that it was made to the chairman in his official capacity and by him reported officially to the Board. The resolution and discussion appeared in the local papers, so that, if a misunderstanding had arisen, ample opportunity was afforded for correction. This was not done. Tho Association tacitly admitted the promise, but failed to send the gratuity, and this too when one of the members of tho Association stated that the tug had saved his office alone some £16,000. It may — as has been done by tho Association—be urged] that, in doing what they did, tho officers and crow of tho tug only did their duty. This may be so, but, as

pointed out by tho chairman of the Board, rewards are frequently given to persons for doing tlieir duty. Besides, apart from this there was tho distinct and positive promise to tho chairman of tho Board, which must have been made with authority, or ho would not have reported it to tho Board. So wo have an Association of gentlemen representing largo interests deliberately repudiating a promise made to reward efforts which saved their principals from heavy loss. Wo cannot think for ono moment that thoy will be content to allow matters to remain in this unsatisfactoiy condition. Their promise has boon given, and should bo kept at all hazards. This is more than a private rnattor botween tho Association and tho employees of tho Board. It is a public question, because public officers have by their strenuous exortions averted a disaster which would perhaps have dono tho port of Lyttolton incalculable damage. If unfortunately several vessels had been lost in that gale, tho owners of skips would havo put a black mark in their books against our port. Thoreforo wo think that it is only right that the faithful discharge of their duties by the officors and crew of tho tug under the most difficult circumstances should be recognised. If the Association fail to seo that it is their duty to uphold the promise given by them, then we contend it will be for the Harbour Board to consider in wbat way it can best mark its sense of tho services rendered to tho public by its employoos.