THE DANGER OF DIVISION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXV, Issue 16488, 2 March 1914, Page 6

THE DANGER OF DIVISION.

The result of the Leith by-election will give the Conservatives another opportunity to rejoice over “tho approaching downfall” of the Liberal Government. At the second general election in 1910 this seat was secured by the Libera} candidate, Sir R. C. Munro-Ferguson, who has been appointed Governor-General of Australia, with a majority of 1785 over bis Unionist opponent. Now it has been won by the Unionist candidate by a majority of six over the Liberal candidate, while a Labour candidate pol'cd 3346 votes. The figures in 1910 were Liberal 7069, Unionist 6284. The figures last week were Unionist 5149, Liberal 5143, Labourite 3346. From these returns it is easy to see that what the Conservatives hope will happen in this country in many constituencies as a result of the abolition of the second ballot has actually happened in Leith. The Labour Party, realising its growing, strength, and wishing to make it known to the world,, put a candidate of its own into the field, and detached a sufficient number of votes from the other progressive candidate to enable the Conservative to secure the seat. It would be too much to assume that in 1910 the Liberal candidate secured the whole of the Labour votes; indeed, last week’s figures show, when the larger poll is taken into account, that this was not the case; but it is tolerably safe to say that tho average Scottish working man does not vote Conservative when he has to make a choice between the two older parties. There can be little doubt, therefore, that but for the appearance of a Labour candidate in the contest the Liberal would have been returned, on this occasion by even a larger majority than Sir R. C. MunroFerguson was returned in 1910. Hie lesson for the progressive electors of this country is one that has been emphasised by quite a number of the byelections at Home lately. The Liberal and Labour parties aro not working so well together as they were doing three or four years ago, and as a consequence they are losing seats in Parliament while gaining strength in tho constituencies. A similar development is threatening in Canterbury. In the other provinces there appears to be a better understanding between tho progressive parties than there is here and much less likelihood' of a dissipation of voting strength. Perhaps the unsatisfactory position in Canterbury is duo to tho greater prevalence of the progressive spirit whicli * breeds impatience, and so often leads to sectional divisions. But whatever the reason, the party leaders ought to get together and arrange a plan of campaign that would avert the danger of Liberalism and Labour helping Conservatism to a further lease of power under a system of minority rule.