The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. SATURDAY, APRIL 12, 1913.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXV, Issue 3802, 12 April 1913, Page 6

The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. SATURDAY, APRIL 12, 1913.

It; will be very interesting to watch developments The Political Struggle in connection in Canada. w i t h the navy debate in. the Canadian House of Commons. Upon the surface, the “light” which has been proceeding for close upon live weeks is over the question as to whether the -Dominion should present Dreadnoughts worth £7,000,000 to the Empire. What is clearly the position, however, is that the party in Opposition is endeavoring to use the proposed gift more as a pretext for an early appeal to the country on policy matters as a, whole. For their part the Borden Government have, as is well-known, intimated in no uncertain way that there is in their opinion no need or no precedent hot submitting the issue to the electorates at the present time, as the Bill is only providing for an emergency and not creating a permanent policy. When a permanent policy is created, they say, the people will have an opportunity of voting on it. To this the Opposition reply that the vote of such a large sum to the Imperial Navy must be regarded as being part of a permanent policy. With a view to ensuring that the Government, which has a majority of 43 over the parties combined, shall carry the day, Mr Borden, it will now bo seen, lias introduced a measure to enable the

minority to be subdued with the aid of what is known as the closure. He plainly sees, it would seem, that if the principle of closure be not adopted his Government may meet a similar fate to that which befel the Government which his Government displaced. In this connection, it will be recalled, what led to the downfall of the Laurier Government was the fact that there was such determined resistance to the Bill with reference to the reciprocity pact that rather than keep the light going any longer the then Government appealed to the country—and as is well-known wore defeated. That occasion was not of course the first instance in which such tactics had led to the necessity for the electors to be heard on an important matter. Some 17 years ago, it is interesting to recall, stone-walling was resorted to in very persistent fashion iii order to prevent thy adoption of a measure forcing Catholic schools upon Manitoba. This measure was fiercely fought by the then Opposition and the fight was, as we have indicated, kept up until a general election was called. Further back in 1885 there was also a heavy stonewall on the Dominion Franchise Bill which among other things was intended to extend the vote to Indians. In the long run, however, the obnoxious clause was withdrawn and the Bill considerably amended was allowed to go through. But to return to the lengthy stonewall that is now in progress on the Navy Bill. The Government claims that Sir Wilfrid Laurier, the loader of the present Opposition, pledged himself previous to the last election to support the.introduction of the closure system. No such system is in force in this country for the purpose of ending a debate and securing an immediate vote upon a measure. In the British House of Commons where a system of closure was introduced over thirty years ago it is done by a motion “that the question be now put.” Whether or not Mr Borden will succeed in getting his Closure Bill safely on the Statute Book remains to bo seen, for of course if lie succeeds the Navy Bill is then bound to pass.