The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE. SATURDAY, FEB. 20, 1892.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 3058, 20 February 1892, Page 2

The Waikato Times AND THAMES VALLEY GAZETTE.

SATURDAY, FEB. 20, 1892.

Equal and exact justice to all men, Oi whatsoever state or persuasion, religious or political.

Custom demands that neither the Sovereign nor any of those to whom the functions of the Crown may be delegated shall take an active part in politics. They only speak publicly on political questions at the opening and prorogation of Parliament, and it is well understood that the sentiments and opinions given expression to in the speeches from the throne are not necessarily their own, but those of their responsible advisers. To refuse to deliver the speech put into their hands by Ministers would necessitate their resignation, and would be equivalent to their dismissal—a power which undoubtedly rests in the Crown, but it is one which in modern times has not been exercised by an English monarch. Lord Onslow has religiously followed the custom during his term of office; consequently only those -who have been brought into official contact with him have had an opportunity of learning his opinions or judging his capacity. In one sense it is to be regretted that custom demands silence on questions oE the day when the Governor happens to be an able and experienced statesman, as an opinion expressed in calm and moderate language by such a man would often still angry political disputes and bring both parties to a true appreciation of the position. This disadvantage, however, is more than counter-balanced by the Sovereign or her representatives not being brought into personal antagonism with any section of the people. Lord Onslow has, howevei', taken advantage of the fact that his term of office is nearly terminated to read the people of the colony a lesson, by means of post-prandial addresses in reply to his toasts at farewell banquets. His remarks in reference to the Legislative Council at the Wellington function demand attention. They go far to explain why the threat of Mr Ballance and some of his followers to swamp the Upper Chamber has not been given effect to. Ho said: "The House of Lords within my experience, and from all that is recerded of it in the annals of history, has gradually accepted the doctrine that like the Sovereign its legal and nominal prerogatives are strictly limited by constitutional usage. I do not gather that your Uppor House claims for itself any higher prerogatives than those which are exercised by the English House of Lords. Neither the House of Lords nor the Legislative Council would reject any measure which, like the Reform Bill of of 1832, had received the deliberate and direct sanction of the electors. Nay more, when once its action has been seriously called into question in any particular by the constituents, it may safely be relied upon never to repeat it. [f it wore conceivable that an Upper House should so far strain its remaining powers, as to mutilate the amendments in such a manner as to thwart the

principle demanded by the electors, or consistently decline to accept from Ministers when it disliked any measures which had not behind them an excited public opinion, it is I probable the next political question upon which the electors would be i called to pronounce would be | some fundamental change in the constitution of that House. But, Sir, the English race is conspicuous above all other nations tor its common sense, and the Upper House is distinguished from the popular chamber by the maturity of the members who have won the position which they hold by sagacity displayed in various walks of life, and it is inconceivable that such a body should ba deserted by the common sense in which Englishmen pride themselves." It is tolerably clear from the above remarks that Lord Onslow has refused to appoint the fifteen men to the Council whose names were we are informed submitted to him. He clearly points out that the constitutional course to pursue in the event of the Council again refusing to pass the measures sent up from the Lower House, would be to ask for a dissolution in order that th*j country might be appealed to for its opinion on the specific measures. Then if the verdict were favourable to 'heir being made law, as the Governor pointed out, tho Council would exceed its proper functions by refusing to pass them and the time would have arrived to seriously consider the reformation or extinction of that branch of the legislature. We agree with His Excellency that the common sense of the Council would lead them — as they are constitutionally bound to do—to bow to the will of the people, The above has been frequently pointed out to the Ministry in thes6 columns and those of the best informed section of the press. Ministers, nevertheless, continue to storm and threaten, urged on by the stern necessity which they are under to pander to the ignorance and brow-beating propensities of their followers. We give Mr Ballance credit for knowing better ; this is no doubt a tribute to his intelligence, and, if justifiable, is in exact proportion to its truth, a slur upon his political honesty. It is distinctly political dishonesty for a man in his position to consent to be a party to the perpetration of a political wrong. Mrßallance must congratulate himself on the fact that the Governor has stood as a buffer between hiui and his supporters.