THE NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2602, 9 August 1882, Page 4

THE NO-CONFIDENCE MOTION.

[FBOM THE “PBBSS.’-'j WELLINGTON, August 8, My anticipations that the Opposition would use the Loan Bills as their last battle gronnd on which to meet the Government in Swn fight hare proved correct. When the ousa met this afternoon, Mr Montgomery announced his intention of moving an amendment to the second reading of the Lean Bill, to the effect that the loan proposals of the Government were unsatisfactory, on which Major Atkinson, of course, stated that no farther business could be proceeded with until such a motion had been disposed of, and the Honse at once adjourned until S.SO to-morrow, when the regular battle will begin. Although I fully expected, as I have telegraphed to you more than once, that the Opposition would make a desperate attempt to defeat the Government on the Loan Bill* I must confess that I did give them credit for better and more tact in the choice of their mode oljflghtfng—that is to say, I supposed they Would avoid assailing in general terms the public works policy of the Government, but'troold have waited their opportunity either to throw out the Loan Bill on its second reading, or to join issue with Ministers in committee on some important detail on which the Government could not consistently give way. Such a plan has after all been worked with success when a direct attack would have iguominiously failed, and I fancied the Opposition would devote their energies to endeavor to snatch a victory in this way, which, while • fatal defeat for Ministers, would not . leave them any excuse for appealing to the country, as in case of a reverse on a general question of policy. However, the Opposition have chosen their own comrse, sad have flung down the gauntlet. It now remains to fight out the battle to the bitter end.

The first question that will bo naturally asked is, “ What are either side’s chances of success p» 'Well, that is not so easy answered, because 1 don’t know when the division will take place. If the division earns off to-night 1 could give yon the respective numbers pretty closely, assuming that every member either recorded his vote or paired. The relative numbers would be— Ministers, 48 or 49, Opposition, 46 or 45. In other words I am doubtful about one man, whom it would be scarcely d’ecreetto indicate explicitly, but those numbers would bo absolutely “ safe” if the division were taken now. If, however, several days or weeks elapse before the question is put, thore may be some modification of the figures, but I think not mnoh. I am aware that the Opposition leaders have been saying from the first that they could not etir a stop until their ground was secure under them, and they imply now that they are sanguine of victory, but not so their followers, or at least many of them. They say with freat candour that they have not the slightest ope of winning, for they give Government the same majority as I have above estimated to be the smallest possible under existing Circumstances, viz, a majority of two, that is assuming, as I have already done, that certain Ministerialists who aro known to be - 'trenuonsly opposed to any further borrowing, wu!..carry their objections so far as to vote against the Government in a no confidence morion.'l am disposed, however, to think that the longer the division is delayed the better the Ministerial chance, because it will enable the plain fact to be driven into members’ heads that the question, as now submitted to them by Mr Montgomery, is in reality not whether they approve or disapprove farther borrowing, as the Government pro. poaala for all these points can be dealt with much more effectively in discussing the Bills themselves. The sole question now raised is whether the present Government shall bo turned ont, and the spending of a new loan relegated to the present Opposition. There i« » strong feeling in the lobbies that this is a mere catch vote motion, and not a straightforward challenge. E very body outside of the Opposition ring is asking why on earth did they put the thing off if they really intended it. Of course Mr Montgomery’s excuse that the measures were not flown Is transparently thin, because their substance was plainly declared at least two months ago; yet the Opposition conld not then muster up courage to attack the Government boldly on their policy, and their only hope haa been to use the loan proposals as a •talking horse, or rather as a means of effecting their ead by a aide wind, as in gfefl date 02 Mr Ormond lost year. Mr Mont* '

gomery’s motion touching the loan proposals is worded almo»t identically with that of Mr Ormond in the local-government proposal*, namely, that they are “ unsatisfactorylt was then thought that the numerous members who disliked the local* government policy of Ministers could not, without openly stultifying themselves, vote against the motion, which pronounced them “ unsatisfactory,” inasmuch as to do so would seemingly bo equivalent to declaring that if not " unsatisfactory ” they must ex necessitate be “ satisfactory.” Of course there is a logical fallacy here, and I think members see through it very clearly this session. Some of them say to me “ Wo object to further borrowing, and we shall vote against the Ijoan Bills, but we can do that just as well without any motion by Mr Montgomery,” or “ We don’t approve of the proposed allocation of the new loans, but wo shall do the best to get that righted in committee.” Both classes agree in adding, “ But this is no reason why we should support a motion which conveys a general condemnation of the Government, and if carried must have one or more of four undesirable results, viz.—(l) Delay of the loan for another year, and consequently a total stoppage of public works; (2) resignation of the Ministers and (3) accession to effioe of unknown and distrusted successors, who would b&ve the spending of the loan if raised ; (4) appeal to the country and general election.” Any or all of bo very serious consequences to osWg about, and I greatly doubt the disposition of most members to run the risk. I have been employing myself assiduously for some hours in endeavoring to glean from the views of both sides how the battle ii likely to go. I have so far indicated the impression left in my mind. Summed up, it is that Mr Montgomery’s motion will bo treated strictly os a party question—one of confidence or no-confidenoe in the Government, and that members will vote on these lines, reserving to themselves the right of exercising their own discretion subsequently in dealing with the Doan Bills themselves, or the details of their appropriation, in committee, and of course if Ministers beat the Opposition on this question they would not stand any nonsense afterwards on the details of the Bill. Thus the action of the Opposition at this particular juncture will tend to prevent the discussion of the loan proposals on their intrinsic merits. Eor this, however, the Opposition care little, so long as they can defeat Ministers, and scramble into office on any terms or at any cost to the colony. lam credibly assured that in anticipation of the coming victory there are no fewer than three promised Premiers, three Treasurers, five Attorney-Generals and Ministers of Public Works, seven Ministers of Education, ten Colonial Secretaries, and twelve Postmaster* Generals. In fact, such a now Ministry will comprise nearly the entire Opposition party. Another not unlikely thing is that of the above promises of portfolios several have been made to members of the Ministerial party in the hope of seducing them from their allegiance. So far as I can learn, all these proffered seductions have been vain. All this, however, supposes that in case of defeat. Ministers would resign, but that is the beginning of a very large question, I have the best reason to know that the hint I gave you some time back is correct, and that should Ministers be beaten on their public works policy, they will claim an immediate dissolution, and appeal to the country on the specific point at issue. I know that the opinion of the most competent authorities is that if defeated on so important a question of policy they wonld be entitled to take the verdict of the country upon it, and you may rely upon it as certain that in oass of a defeat this claim will be made and strongly urged, while as I have said it is the view of experienced jurists that such a claim could not constitutionally be ignored. I have no apprehension that the matter will arrive at this pitch ; the very knowledge that such a consequence might follow a Ministerial defeat will exercise a potent influence over many who assuredly would little care to face their constituents, if they had to do so, as having for personal or party purposes, aided to defeat the Government by opposing them on the question of continuing public works and progress general. So even were the Government in greater danger than I at all believe them to be, the wholesome dread of indignant constituents wonld have a strong tendency to make members run straight. But I do not believe the Ministry to be in any peril, unless some new and unexpected influences should develop themselves. On the contrary, I am convinced, leaving unforeseen contingencies, that the Government will win by at least two votes, more probably four to six, and 1 should not be in the least degree astonished if the Ministerial majority proved much larger than that. I have excellent reasons for believing that one or two members will rather surprise those who sot them down as staunch oppositionists. Some, indeed, say openly that this attack ought to have been made mach earlier if at all, and that not having been made earlier it onght now to be deferred until next session, so as not to impede the progress of necessary public business. Of course there may prove to be traitors in the Ministerial camp, but I do not think it at all likely. One thing is very noticeable, viz, that this sounding of the battle trumpet has been failed by the Government and their followers with genuine delight, end that their gratification at having a i air stand up fight at last is immense, They are in exuberant spirits and confident of triumph. Nobody has the slightest Idea how long the debate will last or when the division will come off. Opinions are widely different on these points. Some expect it to be over by Thursday, others give the debate a week, some a fortnight. It all depends on the course taken in the early stage of the fight. There is one curious feature about it, that the leader of the Ministerial side will have to open the ball, and not the leader of the Opposition. Major Atkinson will have to move the second reading of the North Island Loan Bill before Mr Montgomery can move his amendment of no confidence, and, unless I am very much mistaken, Major Atkinson will frame his speech so as to give Mr Montgomery a very awkward task in following the astute Treasurer. As there are ninety-four members who can speak, the debate might last almost indefinitely, with the enormous capacity on the part of the new House for talk, and I fancy the discussion will be somewhat protracted.