THE GLOBE. FRIDAY, JULY 22, 1881. POLITICAL CRISIS.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2279, 22 July 1881, Page 2

THE GLOBE. FRIDAY, JULY 22, 1881. POLITICAL CRISIS.

The continuation of tlia debate on Mr. Ormond s No-Confidence motion given in onr isane of to-day, throws further light on the manner in which the question is viewed in the House. The points to which we adverted in our yesterday’s article are being brought out'with more or less clearness. Messrs. Bunny and Weston have declared for the Government, and Mr. Saunders, who was reckoned on as a safe supporter of the amendment, has notified his intention of voting against it. The truth of the matter is that Mr. Ormond’s motion took the House so much by surprise that the real drift of his action was not at once apparent. The full depth of the dilemma in which Mr, Ormond had placed himself did not force itself on the minds of the members until they had had some time to look about them. When it has been once recognised that the passing of the amendment means either an appeal to the constituencies, with the attendant expenses and loss of time, or the return of the Government of the country into the hands of Sir George Grey and Messrs Sheehan and Macandrew, members are beginning to think that it would be far better to pnt up with the minor defects of a well meaning, sound, and carefully prepared measure. Many of them who are not altogether with the Government proposals are evidently not at all prepared to bring once more into power a Premier and Treasurer who knows no more about finance than he knows about the other side of the moon, a Native Minister whoso doings wore a scandal and a wonder to surrounding colonies, and a Minister of Public Works whose ideas of his duty were solely confined to grasping as much money as he could for his own corner of the colony—in fine, a Ministry who, when they were in power, did their best to hurry a fine young colony into an early grave. We say that members are beginning to recognise the alternative, and although it is still possible or probable that the present Ministry will be beaten, still, in the event of their defeat, the majority against them is sure to bo a very narrow one.

As a rule, it is not desirable that a want of confidence debate should be a protracted one. Valuable time is lost by such a course, and votes are not influenced thereby. Members talk at and for their constituents, and the interest in the affair is not a sustained one. But the present case is, perhaps, an exceptional one. Time is probably of value, because the crisis has come on so suddenly that members are hardly able to realise at once the true bearings of the case, and by delay public opinion may make itself heard even through the walls of the Parliament House and over the strife of contending tongues. For instance, members may recognize that, as Captain Russell remarked, the complaint against the present form of local government did not come from without the House. There is not a single petition or complaint on the subject laid before the House from anyone or from any quarter. Sir George Grey with his crazy scheme, Mr Sheehan with his proposed return to Provincialism, and Mr. Ormond with his nihilistic tendencies, are the prime actors in the present movement. There is not a whisper from the country. Members, on maturer consideration, may therefore hesitate twice before they press on a motion which may possibly send them back to their constituents in the ridiculous position of gentlemen who have put the country to an enormous expense for the sole purpose of telling a contented body of electors that their case is a hard one.

But, even supposing that Ministers were to resign, if beaten, and not go to the country, would those members who had turned them out find themselves in any better case ? Supposing even that the then majority would agree on some definite platform with regard to local government, would it strengthen their hands at the inevitable general election ? Wo say distinctly—Mo. A general election carried out in the confusion of anew regime would not be favorable to the framers of that regime. .Even supposing Sir George Grey’s or Mr. Ormond’s constructive to be stronger than their destructive abilities—which they evidently are not—could a preliminary trial of their measures do ought else than create a vast body of malcontents ? It is plain enough that their financial proposals are rotten to the core, but, supposing them to be sound for the sake of argument, would the relief felt bo so instantaneous as to counteract the inconvenience experienced by a general houleverseme7it of the machinery of local government. We feel convinced that, the longer the situation is pondered over by members, the less likelihood there will be of the Government being turned out, or, to put it in another way, the narrower will be the majority against them. For the ultimate fate of the Hall party we feel no anxiety. The contrast between what they have done during their term of office and what was effected by the Grey Ministry is not writ in sand but in the chronicles of the country. Mow Zealanders have merely to peruse the pages of those chronicles to gain a true insight into the real merits of the two parties. Before concluding this article we would wish to drop a sympathetic tear over the sad case of our contemporary the " Lyt telton Times.” Its total absence of comment on the present crisis is amusing, if not instructive. It has become suddenly intensely interested in the Eastern Question, in the general question of Free Trade, and other matters; but on the

present all-absorbing question it has maintained a judicious, though not unaccountable, silence. The truth of the matter is, that on the issue of Sir George Grey’s crazy scheme our contemporaryrushed into Me arms with a “ bald-headed enthusiasm” delightful to contemplate. After a few blazing remarks, in which the similarity between Sir George Grov and Sir Robert Peel was lightly touched on, the scheme of the former was dubbed cohesive and comprehensive. Sir George's decisive action was declared to have placed him at the bead of his side of the House,Jand, it was stated, that, Local Government having become the leading object of the day in the world of politics. Sir George had given us the only sound idea of radical reform in that direction. But the singular reticence exhibited by members on both sides as to the extravagant beauties of the ex-Premier’s scheme has apparently somewhat shaken the confidence of our contemporary. It is in the position of a man who has married in a hurry a very indifferent wife. It has probably “ gone into hiding ” until it can obtain a divorce.