THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1907. ANOTHER BACK-DOWN?

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXX, Issue 8873, 6 November 1907, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1907. ANOTHER BACK-DOWN?

In a sub-leader in our yesterday's issue, in referring to the Meikle Acquittal Bill, before the committee of the House of Representatives, we willingly gave Sir Joseph Ward credit for a serious desire to do justice to an injured man. He said she passage of the measure was one which was imposed upon him as a duty, and he was anxious to perform that duty. We accepted his statement unhesitatingly; but from what took place in the House on Monday night we must come to the conclusion that his expressed sincerity was more apparent than real, or that he is no longer able to control his following. It is difficult to come to the latter conclusion, inasmuch as he was able to bring recalcitrant' members of his party to heel when they showsd a disposition to kick over the traces when the land bills were before the House. There is no reason why he should not have taken similar steps in regard to the Meikle Bill. The opposition to the measure came ali most entirely from the Government side of the House, and half a dozen members indulged in a veritable orgy of obstruction; yet the Premier never once attempted to induce them to desist. He sat tight throughout the disgraceful legislative travesty, and only spoke to defend himself against a charge of not desiring to pass the bill which was levelled at him by Mr Herries. The Opposition j supported the measure almost to a man, and had the Premier taken a firm stand with his refractory followers the Meikle Acquittal Bill would now have been in the hands oi' the Legislative Council. He did not take that stand, and if he ij unjustly accused of insincerity he has only himself to blame. During two whole sittings of the House no progress has been made, apparently because a few members are unable to set aside personal prejudices. That, at any rate, is the natural inference to be deduced from the reports of the proceedings,

which in any case were discreditable to a deliberative body such as the New Zealand House of Representatives. It is somewhat significant that yesterday the Premier intimated that he would next day signify the course he intended to adopt in regard to the bill. One would have thought no statement would be necessary. All the Premier had to do was to teli the House at the outset that he intended to pass the bill nolens volens, and to have sat on until it was through. The latest announcement leaves a suspicion in the mind that there is another back-down on hand.