GUBEKNATIONAL PARTISANSHIP.

Manawatu Times, Volume III, Issue 86, 25 October 1879, Page 2

GUBEKNATIONAL PARTISANSHIP.

The seeming predilection of liis Excellency Sir Hercules Robivson for his Tory Premier has been the subject of comment by the. Press, Parliament, and people •, but although certain actions of the Governor gave warrant for such suspicions, there was, until lately, no absolute certainty that such was the ca*e. Titose, however, who were sceptical upon the point, can.be so no longer after reading the correspondence which took place between Sir Hebcules and the Premier regarding the resignation by the latter of his position as Legislative Councillor. The whole tone of the interview retailed by .his Excellency has been, even upon his own showing singularly remarkable for. the lack of courtesy, not to say .evidence of ani-* mus displayed toward Sir George G'B/bv , and an apparent desire to strain a point m favor oE his Conservative ■protege. Then, again Sir Hebcules Robtnsok evinced gross partisanship m furnishing Mr. Hall with his account of what transpired between him and his responsible -adviser —as the late Premier certainly was at the ' time of the occurrence— and had Mr. " De Lautour persisted m his amendment " that m introducing the memorandum into the House Mr. Hall was guilty of a breach of prijn|ege t i'J:liA!_matter plight havo taken an awkward turn for those concerned. The. document furnished by the Governor is an exceedingly lengthy one., embracing ten clauses, but the whole pith of the dispute is contained m the 4th which we have extracted as 'follows-.— • Upon the following day— the 19th of August— the Premier called upon' the Governor, his business being, as he stated, to speak about Mr. Hall's resignation of his seat m the Council. The Premier said he thought resignation a most improper proceeding, and opposorl to. the spirit and intention of the Constitution Act; as the ap? pointment beiner binding on the Crown for life,*the obligation implied mutuality. He said Mr. Hall had twice before left the Council to stand for the House o f Representatives, and that it was within his knowledge, that that was the .object of tho present resignation.. He said he had always' deprecated such a proceeding, and as he /considered the necessity for tho Governor's acceptance of the resignation gave the "Governor a discretion m the matter,., nnd enabled tVe Governor to judge of the propriety of the resignation, he could not advise m this ..case that the resignation should be.' accepted. The Governor l-opliel that the Constitution Act specified :, — " It ' shall be lawful for any member of the Le<.is"i'*ve Council to resign his seat" — and. that the Electoral . Ai-t- imposed no disqualification upon a person standing for the House of Representatives on the ground of being an ex-member, of the Legislation Council. He should, therefore, decline to lend himself to any device for placing one of the Premier's political opponents under a disability not imposed by law. If the pro-ceeding-were lield to be improper, such 'a disqualification— as having been a member of the Upper House— shoull be speiifie-" by the Act ; and pending legislation the Governor should certainly refuse to.be a party 'to such an unprecedented and strained .exercise of a mere formal prerogative for party purposes. The Governor mentionel instances m Victoria m which > men had gone from the Lower, to the Upper House and back again to the Lower. The premier admitted that there had been repea ted instances m New Zealand of members of the Upper House resigning their seats and being subsequently elected members of the House of Representative*, and said that one of his own colleagues, Mr. Gisborne, had done so. But he (the Premier) disapproved so strongly of the proceeding, and had spnken against it so often m public that for. the sake of his", own consistency, he should feel obliged to roch-d formally upon. the. papers his disapproval of Mr. Hall's proposal, and his advice that Mr. Hall's resignation be not 'accepted. He admitted that although the Constitution Act left, the acce.pl apes, to the Governor, every act of the Governor, must, be done.unler advice and Ministerial resp.onsibjlity. The Governor replied tint this view was n.n-' dou^tedly sound, but that the Governor could always reject Ministerial advice if he were prepared to face, the constil ntionnl consequences ; nnd that m this case, if such advice were tendered, he should 'unquestionably refuse it which would leave tlie Premier with the constitutional alternative of resignation orai-quiescenco m the refusals The Governor added that uiilpss the Pre' .roier w^re prepared 'to resign he did not see. 'how the tendi'i'ina a formal advice would vindicate his character for political consistency. The Premier left saving he w'duld •consult such of his colleagues as were m Wellington, and l«t the Governor hear further on the subject. The temerity of the present. Premier U pu^Ushin^ a correspondence 'which

so completely bore out the statement of Sir George Grey is altogether unaccountable. That gentleman had stated m the House' that the acceptance of Mr. Hall's, resignation had not been advised by the late Ministry, and the official correspondence between the Governor and' the Government was brought forward by way of confutation, but what has-been the result.. The 'document nppr only > pro yes that Sir George Grey' declined to advise the step, but that lie most strenuously argued and protested against it ; that his advice as a Minister of the Crown. To Sir George Grey's strong denum ciation -of the practice of members of the Upper House vacating their. seat* to enter the Lower for political and party purposes/his Excellency produced by way of precedent the fact that m Victoria men , had been frequently gone from the Council to the Legislative Assembly ancl back, but when Sir Hercules Robinston entered upon such a line of defence he must have known its utter worthlessness, and that the cases were by no means analogous, inasmuch as the higher Chamber m that Colony is elective and not nominated. One of the arguments used by the late Premier was that as by appointment to the office of Councillor the Crown guaranteed perpetuity of tenure, it was not ooinpotent for the acceptor to relieve himself of the responsihlity whenever inclination prompted such a step. In Victoria" the position of the two Houses were assimilated Far so that tb.it -their members being elected, were dependent updn tho will of the people for their seats, and consequently the precedent produced by Sir I Hercules Robinson was utterly worthless. In the concluding portion of his correspondence, his Excellency evidently felt that some explanation for his extraordinary conduct was necessary and he has given it m the ' following words :— - ' ■ . The Governor feels, however, m some doubt now as to the course that should be adopted m this mat ter. It is a constitutional maxim that the Crown ought not to notice debates m Parliament j but, on the other hand, it is equally unconstitutional for the Governor's name to be brought into debate as it has been. No Minister or ex-Minister has a right to reveal m Parliament what has passed between the Crown and himself, without the express leave of the Crown, and when Sir George Grey referred to things that had taken place between him and the Governor, he ought to have been stopped at once by the enquiry whether he had the Governor's permission to speak to them at all. As it is, a matter which is known fully only to-th* Governor and his late Premier, has been alluded to by the later m Parliament without permission, and placed by him m a light which is not m accordance with the whole truth ; whilst the Governor may possibly be held to be technically precluded by, the rules' 'of Parliamentary privilege from refuting a charge which has m such an unconstitiinal manner- been brought against him by his late Ministry. Two blacks do not make a white, and even presuming that Sir George Grey had acted unconstitutionally, that can scarcely be a licence for the Queen's representative to follow the bad example set him,, and dp likewise. There is no comparison, between the position of the two men,— one the leader of a political 'party, the other the highest Crown official iv the Colony whose very neutrality I*, or- wither • should be. the greatest claim to the office. We imagine that those who read the memoranda penned by hi-s Excellency will have some trouble of acquitting him of gross partinlity towards his Conservatives protege.