Back to Democracy.

(Reprinted from The Evening Post, Wellington, N.Z.)

It is a little more than a fortnight since the colony was startled and shocked by the utterly unexpected news of its Premier's sudden death, and to-day the record majority which he won for his party meets behind a new leader in the House over which he had exercised almost undisputed sway for thirteen consecutive sessions. The interval has been largely devoted by the public to mourning, to reminiscence, and to eulogy—some of it conventional, much of it ununbalanced and extravagant, but most of it the natural outcome of genuine regret and admiration. At such a time it is only according to human nature that the loyal followers of the strong man who has suddenly passed away at the very [unclear: ith] of his fame and powers should have their devotion intensified and idealised by the sense of irreparable loss; while his personal enemies and political [unclear: pponents] are fain in the presence of Death, the leveller of human distinctions and the composer of human quarrels, to [unclear: y] aside their enmity and opposition, and to realise as sincerely as his professed disciples the great qualities of the an who has gone. It is both the strength and the weakness of our common nature that inspire us with such [unclear: eling] at such a time; and even after the immediate crisis is over personal en-[unclear: ity] at any rate is quenched beyond revival. But with principles the case is different; they are as immortal as Death itself—"For Death, he taketh all away, but them he cannot take." Differences of principle defy all human accidents just as surely as personal differences succumb to them; and the greatest of human accidents, which is at the same time the most inevitable of human certainties, has here at least something beyond its power. Dropping generalities, let us then say plainly that if the opposition to Mr. Seddon which was based on personal grounds has now no foundation left, those who dissented from any parts of his policy on broad grounds of principle stand just where they did, and now that the new Parliament is getting to work, it is time for them to speak out. Great as have been the benefits conferred upon this country by Mr. Seddon, especially in the widely divergent spheree of social legislation and Imperial service, and prodigious as have been the exertions which he has expended on its behalf no dispassionate observer can fail to recognise that the same gigantic strength which enabled him to accomplish so much has had its serious drawbacks. Upon himself personally the consciousness of power and the love of power have had the effect of leading him to undertake work enough for ten ordinary men, to squander his strength upon the minutiae of trivial business no less than upon great issues really worthy of his page 2 capacity, to exhaust himself prematurely by incessant toil of a volume and a variety which it is almost appalling to contemplate. Upon the country this monopoly of power had the effect which such a monopoly always has. Whether based upon military force or aristocratic privilege or hereditary claims, or even upon the forma of democracy, despotism is always an evil thing, for which the only justification is that its subjects are fit for nothing else; and whether this justification be held to apply to the present case or not, certain it is that the forma of democracy have not prevented the vesting in a single man for many years of an absolute power which many a contemporary despot would be glad to emulate. It was in a democracy as free as ours that the Greek poet uttered the warning:—

"You need not rear a lion in your city,
But if you rear him, you must all obey."

This has been New Zealand's experience. With a true instinct, in which Carlyle, at any rate, would have rejoiced, the people selected their strongest man, put him in power, and Let him stay there. In return he rendered them, as we have said, some splendid service, and he always showed himself very attentive to their wishes; but now that the strong man has gone, and left no successor of comparable strength, the question for those who cannot dismiss democracy as contemptuously as Carlyle or Cromwell, is whether this is not a suitable time for it to assert its independence, and to insist upon its feebler rulers reverting to more constitutional and democratic paths.

According to the theory of our constitution and to the political cant which has continued to echo theory long after a contrary practice has been established, Parliament is the highest tribunal in the land; but what measure of [unclear: ind] pendence has either branch of the Legislature enjoyed during recent years? According to the theory of our constitution, the Cabinet is a committee of competent men, each of whom controls the affairs of his own department and shares with his colleagues a joint responsibility to Parliament; and here again, how can practice dare to look theory in the [unclear: fac] Both Parliament and Cabinet have [unclear: sa] ficed their individuality to the [unclear: sa] great personal ascendency. One by one the most precious privileges of the House have been whittled away the control of the country's finances, the right to a thorough knowledge [unclear: of] affairs, the power of initiative [unclear: and] a large extent of free criticism, and even the blessing of staying awake [unclear: wh] its most important business is [unclear: tra] acted. The Ministry in case [unclear: after] has usurped what once belonged to Parliament; and the whole duty of its supporters is to vote as they are told and when they are told, and to draw their own salaries and a fair quota of the public money for their respective [unclear: d] tricts in return. As to the Legislative Council, it would be impossible for the most deferential of men to speak [unclear: of] with respect if he has any regard [unclear: at] for the truth. It has become a [unclear: sort] political scrap-heap, a refuge for [unclear: th] rejects, the misfits, and the unknown of political life. Redeemed by a [unclear: f] striking exceptions, mostly dating [unclear: fr] an earlier day, the Chamber [unclear: whi] ought to represent the mature wisdom and independence of the country has become a byword for [unclear: incompetence as] subservience; and this has [unclear: happe] not because capable men were not [unclear: av] able, but because the same [unclear: strong] who had succeeded in imposing [unclear: hit] upon the popular branch of the Legislature could not submit to [unclear: have] page 3 thwarted by the other. We must reserve for a subsequent article the further investigation of the weakening effect which the centralising of power in one pair of hands has had upon all other authorities; and the moral which we shall endeavour to establish is this—that the temporary exigencies of a one-man power such as is not likely to be repeatd for many generations must not be allowed to establish a permanent standard of government, and that Parliament-and the country should take the first opportunity of intimating to the weaker men who must now carry on the work that the same liberties are not to be tolerated from them. They must be content to lead us back to democracy, or to make way for others who will.