SNAP VOTE.

Taranaki Daily News, 16 April 1921, Page 5

SNAP VOTE.

FEDERAL POLITICS SURPRISE. MINISTRY DEFEATED. MOVE NOT SIGNIFICANT. By Telegraph.—Press Assn.—Copyright. Melbourne, April 15. Mr. Jewett’s adjournment motion resulted in the defeat of the Ministry by 32 votes to 30. As it is regarded as a snap vote no importance is attached to the reverse, but Mr. Hughes is angry, stating that he will not be subjected to humiliating defeats. It is understood that before sailing for England, Mr. Hughes will demand ft guarantee of support from the Country Party during his absence. Interviewed, Mr. Hughes said the position created was incompatible with responsible Government. The vote and circumstances were unprecedented during his political career of 25 years. r Received April 15, 10 p.m. Melbourne, April 15. In the House of Representatives, Mr. Hughes moved the adjournment, stating it was impossible for a self-respect-ing Government to carry on after last night’s vote unless the position was cleared up. Mr. Earle Page, speaking for the Country Party, refused to give Mr. Hughes an assurance of immunity during his absence in England, but said no advantage would be taken of his absence. Mr. Page concluded that he Would vote in favor of the adjournment. Mr. Ryan gave notice of an amendment to Mr. Hughes’ formal motion regarding the Imperial Conference, that the Australian representative be not permitted to commit the Commonwealth to any policy without the same being subject to ratification by Parliament and the people. There are indications that the Government will accept the motion for the adjournment as a test vote, but in view of Mr. Page’s declaration it is certain to be carried. —Aus.-N.Z. Cable Assn.

WHY LABOR SUCCEEDED.

NOT BY MAJORITY VOTE. Sydney, April 15. The Herald quotes figures showing that the aggregate polling in all the States and the Commonwealth gives a verdict against the Labor Party in each instance, notably in Queensland and New South Wales, where the respective totals are as follows: —Labor 70,422, anti-Labor 190.300; Labor 285,752. anti-Labor 300,000. The article states: “Labor is in power as the result of the faulty distribution of seats.” '