WHAT TO DO?

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 1084, 19 December 1911, Page 4

WHAT TO DO?

A POLITICAL PUZZLE

Many people are speculating about the direction ot the course which Sir Joseph Ward will take next week when he has all the election figures definitely before him. For the information of the public, the P?st gives details of the procedure in 1890-91, and the opinion ot some constitutional authorities. “ Modern constitutional practice,” says Tod in his *‘ Parliamentary Government in British Colonies,” “has sanctioned a deviation from the rule which forbids an appeal to any other tribunal than that ot Parliament itself to decide upon the fate ot Ministries. Up to the year 1868 the general current of precedent was decidedly in favour of a Ministry beaten at a General Election accepting the defeat only at the hands of Parliament ; and that custom was grounded on the salutary doctrine that it is only through Parliament that the nation can speak. But in 1868 and in 1880 the Conservative administration and in 1874 the Gladstone administration respectively resigned office soon after the adverse result of their appeal to the constituencies was apparent. In 1892, however, the Salisbury administration adopted the old method of accepting defeat in Parliament.

So likewise, in Victoria, upou the defeat of the M’Cullough Ministry at the General Election ot nth May, 1877, the administration resigned on 21st May, the day previous to the meeting of the new Parliament. In like manner the Berry Ministry, iu March, 1880, resigned after a General Election aud without meeting Parliament. Aud iu Canada — shortly after the General Election held iu September, 1878, aud which resulted iu the defeat of the Reform Party at the hustings —the Mackenzie Administration resigned and was replaced by the Conservative Administration ot Sir John A. Macdonald. The new Parliament met at about the same period in February, 1879.

Mr T. A. Freeman views these precedents as introducing a new principle into the unwritten constitution of England, by means ol which the direct action of the electors at their polling booths is capable of effecting a change ol Ministers without the intervention of the House. While deprecating this novel departure from ancient constitutional usage, he considers these recent cases as “ indicating the course which iu all probability will be generally followed hereafter upou similar occasions.”

“The results of the General Election,” says Raven In his “ Parliamentary History of England,” “was not favourable to Lord Derby’s Ministry, It was computed that there were returned to the new Parliament 350 Liberals aud about 302 Conservatives. Lord Derby did not immediately resign. Parliament reassembled on the 31st May. On the Address Lord Hartiugtou moved an addition which, in effect, was a vote of want of confidence, aud it was carried against Ministers by a majority of 14, and the resignation of Lord Derby’s Cabinet followed.”