TOPICS OF THE DAY.
THE KING'S SPEECH.
THOSE who looked for a legislative programme in the King's Speech which would be at once foolish and violent, and hoped that the cause of Free-trade might be imperilled by the recklessness of its Liberal guardians, have been disappointed. Though with certain portions of the Speech we are in disagreement, and though we should have liked certain thIngs left out and certain other things put in, we admit that, on the whole, it is sound and • reasonable, and gives promise of legislation on safe lines.
With the decision come to by the Government in regard to the Transvaal and Chinese labour we are in general accord, and hold that the Cabinet, while in no way showing weakness as to a matter which has stirred the country profoundly, are determined to act with statesmanship and prudence. Though, as our readers know, we are in favour df the democratic principle of "One vote one value," whether here or in the Colonies, we were by no means inclined to adopt the view that the Constitution drafted by the late Government is an instrument which it would be sacrilege to touch. We are not surprised, . therefore, that when the Government determined to grant responsible government at once to the Transvaal, they found it advisable to "clean the slate" and make a fresh start. That their intentions are to produce a Constitution which shall be liberal and democratic in the true sense we do not doubt, but we trust that in carrying out these intentions they will not allow themselves to be unduly influenced by the astute politicians who lead the Boer Party in South Africa. We do not in the least blame the Boers for doing their best to get the Constitution drawn in theirsfavour, and for pressing upon the Government specious pleas for gerry- mandering the electoral divisions, so that, though having a minority of voters, they may secure a majority of repre- sentatives of their views. Considering their position and their history, and remembering that before the war the whole bent of their State policy was to establish and secure illiberal and undemocratic principles in regard to the franchise, it would be absurd to expect them to favour a system diametrically opposed to the Kruger ideal of pro- viding that a greater political value should always be attached to a Dutch than to a British vote. These pleas for the violation of Liberal principles will not, we trust, be listened to by the Government. They must remember also that no solution of the Chinese question, in the sense that the Liberal Party desire, and rightly desire, is in tile end likely to be obtained by giving an unfair predominance to the Dutch vote. Those who bear in mind the history of the Boers in regard to native labour, and the principles upon which such labour was treated by them, will realise that a Boer majority in a Trans- vaal Parliament would by no means find it difficult to do a "deal" with the mine-owners over the question of Chinese labour. The Boer leaders may no doubt say, and for the moment say truly, that they dislike Chinese labour ; but we venture to assert that they dislike it upon grounds very different from those which make the Liberal Govern- ment dislike it, and which have made the Spectator oppose it so strongly. The Boers.oppose Chinese labour because they oppose the mining interest. They do not oppose it on the ground that indentured labour, organised on semi- servile conditions, is injurious to the true interests of a white community. It may be remembered that after slavery was abolished in South Africa the Boer always hankered after indentured native labour of a servile kind, and that special care was taken in both Conventions with the Transvaal to prevent their establishing such labour.
But though the Government must be careful not to give the Boers any position of political privilege in the Transvaal, they must also be careful not to lean—as, it is alleged that the Constitution now abrogated leant— to a system which would give a privileged position to the mine-owners. In our opinion, the present is emphatically a case in which the only safe course is to adopt a just and equitable principle, and to follow it out with boldness. We would make the new Constitution as clearly and straightforwardly democratic as it is possible to make it. That is, we would give, as far as it is humanly possible, an equal w'eight to the vote of every, adult.. white male in the country. We would not increase a man's voting power because ho happens to live in a country district, but we would also by no means disfranchise the grown-up son who happens to live at home on his father's farm. The sound plan is to have no arriere pensee as to how the adoption of the popular principle will work out, but to trust to it as rig-ht per se. Looking at the matter broadly, we want whatever decision is arrived at by the Transvaal to have the maximum of sanction • but the maximum of sanction for the laws made by the Transvaal Parliament can only be obtained if we have ,loyally and straightforwardly adopted a true democratic basis for that Parliament. Any attempts at gerrymandering on one side or. the other will probably make very little difference in the end, but they will have this fatal disadvantage. They will give the beaten side, whichever it is, an opportunity. for saying that the will of the people of the Transvaal is not fairly reflected by the popular .Assembly. We want, both for local and for Imperial reasons, to hear the authentic voice of the majority of the electors. We firmly believe, with the King's Speech, that the grant of free institutions will be followed by an increase of prosperity and of loyalty to the Empire, but it is essential that those institutions shall be free in the widest and truest sense. We note with satisfaction that it is clearly the intention of his Majesty's Government to allow no unnecessary delay in the assembling of the Legislative Assembly, and that . though the elections cannot now take place in July, as originally arranged, they will not be postponed beyond a few months. That the delay of a few months will cause no serious inconvenience, we readily admit; but a prolonged postponement would plainly be injurious. Finally, we are glad to note that the Government intend to persist in their policy of taking no responsibility for the granting of further licenses for Chinese labour while the system of Crown Colony government continues. The Government, we gather from Sir Henry Campbell-Banner- man's speech, will during the transition period do all that they have a legal right to do to mitigate the worst features of the Ordinance.
The paragraph of the King's Spee• ch which deals with Ireland will' have to be tested in the light of the legislation introduced into Parliament, but in respect of the general sentiments expressed we see no cause for alarm on the part of Unionist Free-traders. That the system of government in Ireland requires improvement we do not doubt, and we are certain that a great many economies might be effected in that system—such, for example, as the abolition of the Viceroy and his tinsel Court—not only without injury to Ireland, but with benefit to the whole nation. Further, if a way can be found of associating the people with the conduct of Irish affairs we shall be heartily delighted. Such association by no means involves the establishment of an Irish Parliament and an Irish Executive. Again, we see nothing but what is laudable in the proposal to administer the law in Ireland "in a spirit regardful of the wishes and sentiments of the Irish people. To pro- duce such a result is the aim of every true Unionist. As to the methods by which these principles will be carried out we must wait for further enlightenment. For our- selves, we still hope that it may be possible for the present Government to do the work which ought to have been done by the late Government, and to solve the question of University education in Ireland by establishing a Uni- versity with a Roman Catholic atmosphere which shall fully satisfy the demands of the Roman Church. We also trust that the Government will find means for accelerating the working of the Purchase Act throughout Ireland, and for hastening the process under which Ireland' will become a country of peasant proprietors.
With the reference to rural depopulation we are in hearty sympathy. We hope that in considering measures which may be introduced for keeping the people on the land the Government will not forget the problem of rural housing, and will not overlook the fact that people cannot live on the land if there are no cottages for them to live in. We hope also that they will not let themselves be deluded by any foolish prejudice against the land-owning class into ignoring the immense importance of the rating question as it affects agricultural land.. Our present system of rural rating singles out one industry—that is, the farming industry—and imposes on it a special tax which has not to be borne by the raw material of any other industry. While this vicious system continues there is little hope of being able to place and keep on the land any large number of small occupiers or small owners. We may talk a great deal about State aid to keep people on the land, but as a matter of fact what we do at present is to allow a system of State action which tends to drive them off the land.
No indication is given as to the nature of the Bills which will be submitted to Parliament for dealing with the education question and with the law regulating trade disputes, and therefore it is necessary to postpone any criticism of these measures. We are glad to note, how- ever, that a Bill for the further equalisation of rates in the Metropolis is to be introduced. We are strongly in favour of what may be called old-fashioned Poor Law methods,—that is, of a strict limitation of outdoor relief, and against Socialistic administration in regard to the un- employed. At the same time, we cannot but feel that it is an anomaly that the poor districts of London should be divided off from the rich districts in the matter of poor- relief. Personally, we should prefer to see one Poor Law authority created for the whole of London, for we are not blind to the great evils that come from doles, whether given by the Imperial Government or by some central anthmity, as happens under the system of equalisation of rates.
• The last point to which we will refer in .the King's Speech is the promise of legislation to prevent plural voting in Parliamentary eledtions. To the abstract principle of "One man one vote" we have no objection, but we must strongly protest against any attempt to alter the law in this respect unless it is accompanied by the carrying out of the equally important principle of "One vote one value." To allow Irelaiid between thirty and forty more Members than she has a right to, and thus to give the ordinary Irish voter some five or six times the electoral power possessed by the ordinary English voter, is a far greater injustice and a far greater abrogation of the democratic principle than to allow a non-resident free- holder to vote in a county election. We dislike plural voting, but to abolish it in England and leave it in Ireland would be most unjust. We feel certain that any attempt to legislate on partial lines would be resented by the country, and that the House of Lords would be supported by the nation if it were to refuse its sanction to any Bill for abolishing plural voting which was not accordpanied by a sound and democratic redistribution scheme. We have no wish to arm the rich man with two votes, but to give a man the equivalent of five or six votes because he happens to live in the South of Ireland seems to us an injustice which cannot be left unremedied if once we begin to touch our electoral system.
Previous page
