A CANARD DENIED

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8339, 28 January 1913, Page 6

A CANARD DENIED

It has been thought advisable that a member of tho British Cabinet should formally and officially deny the latest Conservative canard. Our cablegrams this morning show that Mr Herbert Samuel, the Postmaster-General, has stated that there is no likelihood of Ministerial resignations over tho Franchise Bill. We should think not. As Mr Samuel has said, tho Government has too many great tasks in hand to justify a quarrel over ono issue. Of course, there aro issues on which something closely approaching unanimity in the Cabinet-room is indispensable. It is agreement on cardinal points of public policy tliat brings Cabinets together. Thero> could hardly be disunion, for example, on such a question as Home Rule for Ireland, or concerning tho critical conflict of tho last few years between the House of Commons and the “ancient but picturesque'’ peers. Differences of opinion on those matters, except in respect of pure detail, would make it almost impossible to carry on. Also, on the general principle of broadening tho franchise, with the object of giving the masses of the people fair play at tho ballot-box by abolishing the advantages now possessed by property and privilege, the Government would require to be untrammelled by internal discord. When it comes to female franchise, however, it is altogether reasonable to allow individual variety of opinion considerable lattitude. This has never been a party question in Britain. Tho rank and file of both Liberals and Conservatives are divided in their views on the subject. The Cabinet is frankly and admittedly so, and each side is entitled to respect the opinions —even the prejudices—of tho other. If it should be laid down as a hard-and-fast requisite that every member of a Ministry must think identically the same thoughts and form exactly the same conclusions as each ono of ms colleagues upon every possible phase ol every possible subject, a most ridiculous situation would bo reached. First, it would bo practically impossible for any man to form a Cabinet at all; secondly, there would be no value in the cojlectivo wisdom of such a combination if it should bo formed. _ The division of opinion in the British Government on the merits and demerits of women voting is, we believe, not even a misfortune; possibly it has a certain value from the educative standpoint as tending to stimulate the free discussion of ■a most debatable proposition. It was, however, inevitable that opponents of Liberalism should seize upon the circumstances for whatever party profit might be extracted therefrom._ In so far as tho tricks of the Tories may have misled some people, tho denial of Mr Samuel is opportune.