THE LATE CRISIS IN VICTORIA.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5340, 9 May 1878, Page 3

THE LATE CRISIS IN VICTORIA.

[The,, following letter on the lata political crisis 'appears in a recent issue of the Melbourne Argus :—; "an: old politician who would like to see :a harmeny restored between the three branches- of-tha-Legialature ask for space to say a fsw words' on the, subjects which have brought them into collision. They ore (apart from the .Bill for the payment of members) — the righfctclaimbd' by - the Government (X) to pay udthout; Parliamentary. sanction the costs of collecting and managing the revenue ; and (2) to-spend public money for all purposes - on the mere vote of the Assembly ; (3) the dismissal of ; the public servants ; (4) the personal quarrel between the Governor and the President. - These-four-matters; have-caused much acrimonious discussion, 'tint the two first are the most important. It cannot-be : denied that with reference to the dfitb 'clkuse of the Constitution Act, 1 the Government have .the opinions of several competent- lawyers in. favor of their interpretation. Mareover, to one not conversant with the legal interpretation of statutes, the language used in this clause seems plainly to point to a power to spend certain money without- any further legislative appropriation., Nevertheless, I cannot, help thinking that by making, these, costs,, a permanent charge upon the consolidated revenue, and directing such expenditure to bo reviewed and audited by the Legislature, the Imperial Parliament has not given the Executive the power to fix at its discretion either its details or its total amount. This, it will bo observed, is not a question of the power of the Assembly, but of the Executive for ifthis money can bo taken without a special*’act bf "appropriation, it can bo taken equally■ wßheut a vote of the Lower House. - In o'tbfiT.'. words, if this-power exists, the Governor and Executive Council can alone' determine how many .officera are to be employed in'/collecting the revenue, and how much they are to be paid. In that case, the authority to review and audit its of .no value,, m the r'eontroja The fraraera of the Constitution surely never intended this., ~The

clause cannot mean -more than a general; direction that in appropriating the consolidated revenue provision must, in the first instance, bo made for defraying the coat of the machinery by means of which that revenue is collected. In that sense only can I understand this cost to be a charge. In 18-13 or 18*11, when the Legislative Council of New South Wales—one-third nominees and twothirds elected—began ruthlessly to cut down salaries and abolish officer, the collector of customs of that day asserted his right to pay himself and his subordinates under a similar clause to the 45th of the Victorian Act, in the 5 and 6 Vic., cap. 76. But the people’s representative—including such men as AVontworth, Lowe, and Windeyer—ridiculed this contention, and it was not persevered in. That Legislature—said at the time by English statesmen, to bo able as any then existing—claimed aad.established the right to deal with the whole expenditure, notwithstanding the schedules! when money beyond the amount of tho schedules was asked for. In the exercise of this right they dealt with the Customs Department with extreme - rigor, and abolished and curtailed where they thought fit, - entirely disregarding the 26th section of their then Constitution Act. This section, and the like sections in subsequent Constitution Acts, ceased to have any meaning after the introduction of responsible government, and the handing of the control of the whole civil service over_ to the local Parliaments and Executive Councils. When, in 1813, authority was for the first time given to the New South Wales composite Legislature: to regulate supply, it was thought that some of the departments should be protected from interference by gentlemen about whose wise or prudential exercise of power English statesmen were slightly uncertain. Certain leading officials were placed in sche-dules,-public worship was provided for, and the clause to protect the colleotiou'of the revenue was inserted in the first Act which in this part of the world gave the people a Voice in legislation. Down to that time New South Wales, which then included Victoria as well as Queensland, : was ruled paternally by a Governor and nominee Legislative Council, i The Secretary of State for the Colonies had'in administra-. tive matters absolute power, and the Customs Department, through which 1 all the revenue but a mere fraction was collected, was a mere, branch of the Custom House in Loudon, It was not intended by the.first concession iu 1813 to place the officers of Customs tinder local control, even as far : as their salaries were concerned, but the'Legislative Council at once assumed such power. When, in 1855, responsible government was conceded, the same clause in reference to the permanent charge was thoughtlessly inserted iu tho Bill sent Home for approval, and there it remained,. while the motive' which caused its enactment originally no longer existed. In the same thoughtless manner it found its way into the Constitution'Act of this colony, and has so a part of the law of both colonies ever since. Its presence in the statute-books of- New South AVales and Victoria has passed ■unheeded for nearly a quarter of a century, becouse -until now-no attempt has been made towichdraw from Parliamentary sanction any of the salaries of the public servants except those permanently, provided for. The question that has-now arisen here is, whether this 15th section is to be literally construed.- I venture to express my opinion in the negative. A uniform practice in the, two colonies for so many years at variance with this contention suffices to indicate general understanding, and the utter incompatibility of such: a construction with the free exercise of Parliamentary government shows that it cannot be the right one. : The fact is, that a law like this ought to receive a broad- constitutional, instead of a narrow legal construction. This 45th clause is not like a law imposing a penalty on a hawker, to be interpreted by a court of petty sessions.. Its true construction is a matter not of technical law merely, but of statesmanship also, and the . decision should be arrived at on a" comprehensive view of the state of things existing at the time of its passing, and the far different state of things prevailing now. When the power to appoint and remove all the civil servants became vested in colonial Governments necessarily acting under the direct control of local Parliaments, this power to appoint such officers of revenue as might be thought necessary, irrespective of Parliamentary sanction; and at such salaries as the Government might deem expedient, must of necessity have lapsed. The two things could not co-exist. For these reasons I submit that Mr. Berry and his colleagues are wrong in claiming to pay the cost of the collection and management of the revenue without the sanction of an Act of Parliament.

The question of their right to expend money on a mere vote of the Assembly ad- - mita of a shorter answer. The 55th section of the Constitution Act directs (subject to certain payments)-all the consolidated revenue; to bo appropriated by Acts of the Legislature. A vote of the Assembly is not an Act. That both here and in New South Wales the Appropriation Act has often been anticipated by the Government is undoubtedly' true. - In passing items in committee of supply, both Assemblies have hundreds of times been asked to vote moneys already expended. But in all these cases the money was expended with a view to and in- the expectation of legislative sanction—never with the knowledge that it would be refused.- The attempt now made to set aside the Legislative Council and make the vote of - one House equivalent to an Act, is so absolutely in defiance of law that it cannot ;be termed anything short of a revolution. That the:majority in the Assembly should have gone ; the length of submitting this out-, rageous: view; of theirs for the opinion, and as they hope; the sanction, of the authorities in; England, almost exceeds belief,-as it certainly passes comprehension. The Colonial Office has shown much incapacity at all times, and more of late than formerly, but they must stand aghast at this new development of colonial liberalism. It carries us back at one step to the France of 1789. There can be but one answer to a proposal so absurd. The dismissal- of the public servants was, however improper, a proceeding clearly within the law. Where a public officer is not protected in the tenure of his office by contract or enactment, he may be removed at all times by the Executive, but arbitrary dismissals without cause are not in accordance with English ideas or practice. : That love of fair dea'ing which has been hitherto so characteristic of Englishmen in all parts of the world discountenances such a proceeding. There is nothing in the American system which is more severely condemned by Englishmen than the wholesale removal of the public servants on the coming into power of a new President who is of a different party from his predecessor. This liability to dismissal without cause, combined with ; the smallness of the" salaries, has made the United States officials corrupt and inefficient almost , ( beyond, ; example. : iThe British civil servant, who does not go in and out with Ministries, knows that whoever may be in power his. office will not be abolished, except on public grounds and after due deliberation, Should such abolition be necessary, he further knows that compensation either in the shape of money or a new appointment will assuredly be given him., .Dismissals from personal antipathy or party spite ate absolutely unknown in the British Isles. The gross injustice of such a thing is there universally recognised. . TiU January last itsrecognition in these colonies was equally'strong. Then, for the first time in- a British community, had we the deplorable example set, of some hundreds of persons —many of them with families dependent on them, and without other means o! support than their salaries —suddenly turned adrift. His Excellency the ; Governor has ■ been - blamed for acting on the advice of his Ministers on that occasion. Bit if it he true, as is currently, reported, that Lord Carnarvon in 'emphatic terms warned b>m - against bringing - the home and Imperial Governments into collision, and directed him to let his Cabinet do as 'they liked within the law, in all local matters where Imperial interests were not involved, it is, difficult to see how he could have acted otherwise . than he has done. As an English gentleman of large experience in various Governments,: and one thoroughly conversant with English feelings - and traditions, he must have been /fully satisfied.with the injustice as well as the impolicy of the course to which ho was asked to give his sanction. Obedience, however, to instructions is the first duty of a Governor. Onthe assumption that-Lord;; Carnarvon’s directions to Sir George Bowen were such as is generally supposed, on -his Lordship must rest, the blame of these unfortunate disihissals. For li long time post the reins in, Downingstreet have been 'gradually relaxing; the hands that; held them have :been growing weaker. Godwin Smith—that arch impostor. and most anti-English Englishman, so well and so justly scarified in Lothair —first started the notion that the colonies were an incumbrance. Lord Granville; • Mr. - Gladstone, and Mr. :Lowo did their utmost . to reader - this notion .prevalent,; and Lord Cardarvon, though a member of'a, Tory Cabinet which recognises the fact that the colonies. are essential to the greatness of the Empire, has

,on several occasions shown more sympathy with liberal than with conservative views in his colonial administration. It is more than probable , that a man like this, who, happily for tho honor of England, is no longer iu power, should have placed the Governor unrestrictedly in the hands of his Cabinet for the time being.: In that view of the case the condemnation with which he has been visited is unwarranted,, and ought to be withdrawn. There is strong reason also for supposing that Mr. Berry and some of his colleagues are not satisfied with the course which they have taken since the Appropriation Act was passed. No impartial observer can doubt that the proper thing then to have done would have .been: to restore, as from the date of their dismissal, all the survivors of ‘ those who had been removed (for ■oino have. died in tho meantime), and who had not accepted compensation. That the removals were the result of any inquiry leading to a colivic.ion of the necessity for permanent retrenchment cannot for a moment be supposed,, because in that .case so many would not have been already restored. These restorations seem, to-show that the dismissals were improper. _ It is asserted in many quarters that the.civil servants in this colony are too and this assertion is probably correct. That being so, it is the duty of the Government iu the public interest to retrench, but these retrenchments should be made prudently, deliberately, and after the excitement of a fierce struggle has died away. Mr .Berry, feeling the responsibility of office more than his colleagues, would, it is said, have preferred this course; but however that may be, he and they have lost a good opportunity of showing friends and opponents alike, that in .taking a course painful to individuals they did ” nought iu hate but all in honor.” I fear that the extreme violence of some of his colleagues ami supporters in this business will have done much to lower the estimation iu which a great community like this ought to.be held. They may depend upon it that every serious departure in administrative matters from the Imperial standard is a mistake, if indeed it ought not to be called a crime. , - !

Sir William Mitchell’s quarrel with the Governor, though not properly speaking a public matter, has given rise to much ill feeling, and it has intensified tlie hostility which has been exhibited towards his Excellency and his Ministers. - And yet it ‘ seems-that this quarrel was capable of easy adjustment. In a friendly conversation the President gave a sort of warning to the Governor, which His Excellency’understood as indicating the pro[Lability of an appeal to the Colonial Office on a matter which involved no charge of dishonor whatever.' Afterwards the Governor heard that the thing meant by Sir William Mitchell was the insertion, in: tho message" recommending the Supply Bill; of a sum of money to be expended at Government House, and from what was reported to him he drew the inference (rightly or Wrongly) that it was imputed to him that he had backed up his Ministers because of this insertion. It would have been better if he had at once inquired of ; Sir William Mitchell whether he ever made, or, intended to make, snob a charge as this. This inquiry would, so far as we can judge, have resulted in an immediate denial. But ,his Excellency, under the impression (contrary to . that which he received from Sir AVilliam Mitchell himself) that a gross charge was then intended to he made to his face, and that that, charge was renewed afterwards to Sir Hercules Robinson, gave utterance to the strong language of resentment which has since been laid before the public. When his Excellency came to believe that his elevation to the “ precipice” spoken of was caused by an act so grossly improper as the taking of a wrong course as Governor, in consideration of pecuniary advantage to himself,' his right to be indignant cannot be disputed. No gentleman, whether Governor or not, could be expected to do otherwise than resent such a charge as this. One word of enquiry before the expression of this resentment might have put matters straight. But that inquiry was not'made. and an angry correspondence so widened the breach that explanation or withdrawal became impossible. This is unfortunate, because everyone must now see that this quarrel was wholly unnecessary, and might have been avoided. And now one word about the threatened reform of the Legislative Council by means of a phhiscitum. In the first place, nothing could have demonstrated more completely the necessity for a strong’secondO hamber than the events of the last three or four mouths. There can be no doubt that the question of the payment of members is fairly debatable. It is a question, and an important question of general policy, and as such one to be determined by the Legia-. lature alone. But the Legislature consists of two Houses, each of which, by the Constitution Act, has exactly the same power as the other to say whether a Bill for the payment of members shall be passed or rejected. The Council thought fit in the exercise of their undoubted right and power to refuse their assent to a Bill of this character which’ the Assembly had sent up to them. .The Assembly thereupon tacked this proposal to the Annual Appropriation Bill, in order to deprive the Council of its power to reject it, except at the cost of throwing all the departments into confusion by the stoppage of. supply. About the impropriety of this attempt.: at coercion there cannot, among impartial men, he two opinions. Of course :there is a time when, and there are questions on which, such a body as the Legislative Council should give way to the more popular’ branch. No constitution that requires for legislation’ the co-operation of independent bodies, checking one another, can be worked except ,by, wise forbearance and occasional compromise. ‘ The action of the Assembly was.such as to render conciliation for the time; impossible, and now an insane outcry has been raised either for a total abolition of the second Chamber, or ‘ the creation of a senate that would be a cipher. The precise plan on which this body is to be' established has not: been made ’ known—has ' not in fact been designed—but the general idea of it is, that it is to be incapable of thwarting the Assembly. Mr. Berry is ’ reported to;have said that the Imperial Parliament is to be asked to give the people here the power to frame this Upper House, at the same time declaring that should that power be withheld the people iii question will take the matter into their own hand.

I don’t believe that Mr. Berry is so foolish as this treasonable gasconading would imply, but that he thinks that a plebiscitum is the proper thing there is no doubt. If there is one thing which the people in their primary assemblies are more incapable of doing properly than another, it is the framing of a constitution. The leading idea of the masses in all times and in all countries is that their will ought to prevail, and of the fatal result of such a theory carried into practice history affords us many memorable and disastrous examples. At present the broad ASgis of England overshadows and protects us, aud the day I hope is far distant when any knot of angry and illinformed but perhaps well-meaning politicians will be allowed to by the negligence, or folly, or incapacity of English statesmen to turn this great and; hitherto most prosperous colony into a new arena for displaying as charming novelties the dirty, ragged, cast-off garments of the Communists of the present or the Jacobins of earlier days.—Yours, &c., April 19. _ ,2C.