The Guardian And Evening Star with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, JULY 16th, 1924. THE KING AND LABOUR.

Hokitika Guardian, 16 July 1924, Page 2

The Guardian And Evening Star with which is incorporated the West Coast Times. WEDNESDAY, JULY 16th, 1924. THE KING AND LABOUR.

"Tim ceremony and display implicit ill tlie institution of Kings and v_oilits have lieen denounced in Socialist amt Radical journals, cliieily because of the contrast between these- things and the lives of tile poor,” says Mrs Philip Snowden in the ‘•Spectator”. “Labour speakers and Labour journals have denounced Labour leaders in the past for attending Court Junctions, and for associating on public occasions with royal personages; hut this criticism has never been either deep-seated or widespread. The Labour movement on the whole, has taken a j.metical and comnionsense view of the relations between the Court and the people, in part, too, the absence ol serious controversy on the question of the King and J.a-liour has been due to an appreciation of the irrelevancy of the matter to tile general economic and social aims of the J.ibour Baity. There are more important affairs in hand. Republicanism, like the question of the Disestablishment of the Church, is regarded as of little consequence when compared with that group ol economic problems which concerns the provision of .siillieieney and security lor all. Unless it could lie shown that the .Monarchy is responsible for the existence of poverty, and is an obstacle to its removal, it would he a waste of time and effort to direct agitation to the abolition of the .Monarchy. And that cannot he proved, Iheeaues it is not true. The social contrasts and economic injustices of our time, are not due to forms of government, but to far deeper causes. In democratic countries under either Constitutional Monarchies or Republicanism, the same economic conditions exist:

VKor forms of government let fools contest.

Whate’cr is best administered is host.’

“Indeed, L think it could he argued with .success that in a country like our own. "hero the head of the Stale is a constitutional monarch who stands outside party and political controversies, and acts only on the advice of his Ministers, who in effect are chosen hv the people, there is a greater safeguard of democratic ideals than in a country where the temporary head of the State is the creation of party politics. There is certainly greater security for purity in the national administration. The strength of the Monarchy in Great Britain lies in its strict aloofness from political partisanship. Any serious departure from this impartiality would quickly discredit the Crown and lead to an irresistible Republican movement, which would command support from men n.iul women in all parties. In the recent political revolution which has brought the Labour Party into office the King has acted, as every reasonable person knew he would act, with the strictest constitutional propriety. Tie has shown that he has no political bias, and tUat he has no more personal likes or dsilikes for the Labour Party and the Labour-Government than he would have for any other party placed in power in a constitutional way. On the contrary, if there has been any departure from the way ill which the Crown usually acts, in the manner in which it has acted towards a Labour Government, it lias been shown in a punctilious care not to give the least ground for suspicion that the Labour Government was regarded by the King and his Court as lteing. front the point of view of the Constitution, in any way different from a Liberal or a Conservative Government. To the credit of the Labour Government-, it must lie said that they have not made the task of the King difficult. They have accented all the existing constitutional usages. They have regarded the King as the constitutional Head of the Nation. He. like the permanent Civil Service, is the permanent official who never changes in allegiance to the Ministers who come and go. The King and the Civil Service may hate their own personal views upon political matters, hut- these are never allowed to influence the faithfulness of the service they render to the Ministers for the time being. T have often hear-' it said in days gone by that a Labour Government would never have fair play, because it would he sabotaged hv the Court and the permanent Civil Service. These fears have been-proved t-o lie quite unfounded. From the King downwards, throughout the Civil Sendee, the Labour Government has had nothing but fair play. Suppose that the party had acted as some of its opponents would no doubt have |iked it to act? Suppose it bad out-

ragod all constitutional custom? Suppose its Ministers had gone to receive their seals of office in hobnailed hoots, with unwashed faces and col la Hess shirts? Suppose they had disregarded all conventional courtesies as marks of servility? Suppose they had treated the King and the heads and officials of the Civil Service with a hectoring authority, regarding this as the mark of democratic ]«jwer? Would all this have added to the respect and confidence the public would Have had for them. Such conduct would quickly have covered them with deserved contempt and ignominy. The King, hy his respect for constitutional procedure, has greatly helped the Labour Government; and the Labour Government, by its respect for constitutional methods and its acceptance of all reasonable conventions has made the difficult jiosition of tlio Crown in the now and unique tiicumstaccs easier. The smoothness with uhich the Lalxmr Government was formed, and with which its course has run so far. is a wonderful example of the adaptability of the British Constitution. That Constitution, broadening down ilrom precedent to precedent, lias proved itself capable of entrusting the Government of the conn try. with the co-operation of the King, to men who have no claims to high office on the grounds of liirlh, class, or academic distinetton, hut whose claims rest upon personal merit, .public service, and the free choice of a democratic people. It is a great Constitution which provides for the association of the King and a Labour Government in the administration of national affairs.”