THE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT CRITICISM.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume XI, Issue 3501, 1 June 1920, Page 2

THE QUEENSLAND GOVERNMENT CRITICISM.

REPLY BY THE PREMIER. LONDON, May 27. Mr Theodore, the Queensland Premier, interviewed, expressed surprise that a great authority like Berriedale Keith should allege that there was a breach of constitutional rules in connection with the appointment of a partisan as Acting-Governor, 'the swamp--1 ing of the Upper House and the fact I that the ActihgGovcrnor had not ex- ' ercised the right of reserving assent to the Bill because it prejudiced the rights of British subjects outside the State. Mr Theodore said: "If the Government acted unconstitutionally the point may easily be tested.” He added: “Even Governors invariably held definite political opinions prior to appointment; therefore they may all be classed as political partisans. The appointment of new members, oven to the extent of swamping, has never been considered unconstitutional. IJt has occurred- in recent years in Now South Wales and New Zealand.” Mr Theodore admitted that the referendum provides Queensland with a means of settling disputes, but involves great delay and expense. He does not regard Mr Keith’s suggestion to establish an Imperial arbitration tribunal as practicable, as it involves the rcaetiomuSy, principle of limitation of sovereign rights. “It will not find a solitary supporter in the Dominions,” said Mr Theodore. “Noninterference is the safest doctrine.” Sir Gerald Strickland, late Govern- I I or of New South Wales, states that | Lord Milner cannot be expected to j disallow acts of the Queensland Government, but Mr Keith’s remedy is open to grave objection. The Australian High Commissioner is the proner authority to decide such subjects. It must be made plain to investors that appeals on local matters to a distant Secretary of \Stat<a( (are futile. Future success of democratic Government appears to require that every executive should bo liable ito some control. “My experience in Tasmanm. Western Australia and New South Wales shows that although Ministers dislike it electors appreciate the exorcise of an impartial authority in their behalf. Governors should bo able to deter Ministers from flagrant breaches of the constitution by forcing appeals to the electors on rare occasions.”