THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY. DECEMBER 9, 1893. THE UNEMPLOYED.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2592, 9 December 1893, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY. DECEMBER 9, 1893. THE UNEMPLOYED.

SPLIT IN THE CABINET

Much as the position is coveted, and greatly as it is sought after, there cauuot be the slightest doubt that the life of a Minister of the Crown is not always a happy one. No man has ever entered Parliament who has worked more earnestly and honestly in the interest of labor than the Honorable W. P. Reeves. His work, too, has been extremely successful, and even his severest critic—the Christchurch Press—has had to admit recently that his department was excellently administered. During the recent election a great unemployed agitation was got up in Christchurch, chiefly by Mr Eden George, for electioneering purposes. Mr G eorge tried to get Mr Reeves to nominate him as one of the Government cancidates for Christchurch, but this Mr Reeves very wisely declined to do, and so, out of a spirit of revenge, Mr ieorge worked up the unemployed agitation. He insisted that the Government ought to cut a ship canal from Christchurch down to the sea, so as to give work to the unemployed, and argued that Mr Reeves was the greatest enemy of labor in politics. It happened at the time that there were a good many people out of employment in Christchurch, and, believing that in view of the election work would be found for them, they made very imperious demands on the Minister for Labor. He was their servant, not their master, they said, and they would compel him to find employment for them. Mr Reeves, however, took a firm stand, and refused to provide local work for the reason that there was uone to do. He, however, sent such as were ready to go to Southland, where employment was found for them in bushfelling and road-making on the cooperative system of labor. In this connection there are two points which in our opinion redound to the credit of the Minister. In the first place, it was courageous on his part, in the middle of a very hotly-contested election, to speak firmly to several hundred men who had been incited against him by a self-seeking demagogue, and we think all fair and reasonable men ought to give him credit for it. This, however, is exactly what has not been done. There is in Christchurch an evening paper called Truth which is endeavoring to get itself read by means of sensationalism. It has no more sympathy with labor than “ the man in the moon ” ; it frequently refers to laborers sneeringly as “ the pore working men,” and condemns scathingly all legislative enactments calculated to benefit the working classes. This paper is now condeming Mr Reeves for sending these men to Southland, and trying to make the co-operative system appear as a delusion and a snare. Here then is the next point to which we desire to call attention. The co-operative system has been condemned for its wastefulness, because the men earn too much money, but Truth has now gone on another tack The men sent to Southland have evidently had very hard times of it, and Mr Reeves, the Labor Bureau, and the co-operative system of work is blamed for all. From the evidence so far collected, however, it would appear that the men were sent bush-felling first of all, but, of course, that is work at which inexperienced workmen could not earn good wages. Finding this would not pay, they made their way to Invercargill, suffering great privations on the journey, and were then sent to work on the Otago-Central Railway. Here they worked three weeks and earned only £2 19s fid, but they had thirteen wet days during that time. That means that only for the weather they would have earned very good wages, but surely Mr Reeves cannot be expected to control the elements and provide good weather as we}l as good work. Mr Reeves did apparently al}" he could, and it is unfair and unjust to throw ail tho blame on him, Mr Reeves could not make bricks without straw ; he could not provide work in the neighbourhood of Christchurch when there was none to do, but his political opponents, who want to create distrust in him, do not consider this. However, the facts which have been made patent are, that there has been much want of employment in Christchurch, and that the families of the unemployed have suffered groat privations. There is only one remedy for this, and that is to provide homes on the land for such people. Let them get a bit of laud, and then when not otherwise employed they can work for themselves, and grow at least sufficient to keep the wolf from the door. This is the main plank ip'the Qqyerpipeut policy; it is the true remedy for the unemployed I; fficulty, and consequently we feel c'onS'T i. ' u “t before Jong it will be fident inc. * 4 5 practically settled.

Evef. since the elections closed paragraphs have appeared in the Conservative papers stating that there is a split in the Cabinet, which will soon lead to a disruption. This is a very old story. We have never known a Cabinet in New Zealand which was not always splitting, but only on three or four occasions did these splits lead to anything serious. First, there was a regular burst up in the Cabinet of Sir George Grey; secondly, a difference arose in the Cabinet of Sir John Hall in 1882, which led him to retire, and hand the Government over to Sir F. Whitaker. Shortly afterwards Mr Bryce disagreed with his colleagues over the Native question, and retired, but, his policy proving to be the correct one, he was again reinstated into office. Again, in 1888 Mr Fisher was literally kicked out of his Cabinet by Sir Harry Atkinson, and these are the splits in Cabinets with which we are acquainted. But there has been a single Cabinet concerning

which rumors of internal dissensions have not been raised. Immediately after the death of Mr Ballance it was said that very serious differences existed between the Premier and the Honorable W. P. Ileeves, but we are in a position to say that both these gentlemen were on the most amicable terms at the time. Ever since the elections similar rumors have been afloat, but after full inquiry the Wellington correspondent of the Otago Daily Times says that the only cause of dissension in the Cabinet is the question as to whether Sir Patrick Buckley will be permitted to retain his status as a Minister of the Crown while paying a flying visit to the Old Country. Sir Patrick Buck’ey intends leaving for the Old Country immediately, and return in time for next session of Parliament. He will only be away about five months, and it would be very bad treatment to deprive him of his status for that time. Thera cannot be any dissensions in the Cabinet over that.