CHAPTER SI1 THE LAST MONTHS OF THE WAR IF the Prime Minister’s assertion of the intention of his Government-to “ decline to take responsibility for the conduct of public affairs ” unless given power to secure re- inforcements by compulsion-had been less emphatic, and had contained a convenient conditional phrase, the political predicaiiient caused by the referendum of 1917 would have been avoided. But it was a peculiarly hard and fast declara- tion, without the semblance of a limitation. Similar declara- tions were made by other members of the ministry. hir. Hughes’s “ Merry Christmas,” at his country home in the Dandenong Ranges a few days after the referendum, was therefore marred by the prospect of having to carry out his pledge by placing his resignation in the hands of the Governor-General. Ministers and members of Parliament spent the traditional Season of “peace and good will,” both of which were con- spicuously deficient at this time, at their homes, but in the first week of a hot Melbourne January they began to gather at the seat of government. Parliament was to meet in the second week of that month. Speculation as to what would happen kept political circles agog. Would Mr. Hughes resign after all ? Would the Nationalist party insist upon keeping him to his undertaking? Would the whole ministry retire and give place to a fresh combination? If so, who would succeed as Prime Minister? During the opening days of thc new year there glimmered upon the horizon a streak which seemed to preqage storm. Sir John Forrest was reported--and the report was not afterwards denied--to be in disagreement with his colleagues, and there were com- mentators in the Nationalist journals who expressed doubts about Mr. Hughes’s leadership. His Bendigo declaration was said to have been “gratuitous,” and it certainly was now proving embarrassing. His virulence was pronounced in- jurious, and it undoubtedly had left a legacy of rancours. The Treasurer, it not prepared to revolt against Mr. Hughes’s leadership, at all events made it known that at a Cabinet meeting held on January 2nd he had “ refused to place himself 431 432 AUSTRALIA DURING THE WAR [and-4th Jan., 1918 unreservedly in Mr. Hughes’s hands.”’ He had never believed in the second referendum, and was now able to adopt an “ I-told-you-so ” attitude. Eiit. though Sir John Forrest had influential friends, and the “ feeler ” in his behalf was unmistakahly put forth, it was soon seen that the Nationalists in Parliament were not prepared to throw over their leader. On January 3rd a full meeting of the party was held at Parliament House. Discussion was prolonged during five hours and, before it ccncluded, the following resolution was carried by 63 votes to 2: “That the Federal National party expresses its continued confidence in hlr. Hughes, and in view of the esceptional circumstances considers that in the best interests of the country and the Empire Mr. Hughes should retain the leadership of the party.” The two dissentients, it was learned, were Mr. Fowler and Mr. Gregory,* both, like Si1 John Forrest, Western Australian representatives. hir. Hughes was therefore sure of his party, and, for him, that was the key to the situation. There was some dis- agreement about tactics, but that was of minor importance. Sir William Irvine, while cordially supporting the leadership of hir. Hughes, urged that, as it was evident that the leader of the Labour party, Mr. Tudor, could not form a ministry, there ought to be a general election, at which the Nationalist party should boldly pledge itself to conscription. But Mr. Kelly, the member for Weniworth, and others urged that the LalJour party was then tending to a policy of non-participation in the war, and that it would be treachery to the Allies to permit it to appear to have even the chance of coming into office; and this opinion was the prevalent one on the Nationalist side.3 Still, the dissentients were busy, and, at an adjourned meeting of the party on January 4th, another name was put forward as an alternative to Mr. Hughes. Upon the first resolution passed on that day there was substantially no disagreement. It declared: “That this party, in view of the 1 The Argus, 3 Jan, 191s ZHon. H.,Cregory hf LA, W. Au4t.. rSg:/io11: Acting Premlrr. and Trea surer. rgro,rr. menilwr of C’wealtll House of Reps, lg13/40 Of Perth, W. Aust, and St Kilda. Vic , b Kyneton. \‘IC, 15 March, 1560 Dled 1.1 Nov, 1940. a Afr. Kelly urged privately on his party the formation of a Nationallst govern- ment under a stop-gap leader, and suggested that Alr Wlse. being an Independen: memhpr of the group, should be CllOSCli 4th-8th Jan., 19181 LAST MONTHS OF THE WAR 433 recent declared attitude of the official Labour party on the vital questions of the conduct of the war and peace, declares that in the interests of the country and the Empire it will not support any course of action that will hand the Govern- ment of the Commonwealth over to the official Labour party.” But a second motion disclosed a larger anti-Hughes section than was apparent on the previous day. It was moved: “That this National party approves of the Government honouring the pledge it gave to the people that unless it got the power asked for it could not and would not carry on the government, by tendering its resignation, and that Mr. Austin Chapman‘ be asked to form a Government.’’ To this an amendment was moved in the following terms: “That the matter be left in the hands of the Government to take whatever steps it deems advisable to give honourable effect to the pledge given to the people of Australia.’’ The amend- ment was carried; but there were seven dissentients. Mr. Hughes’s hands, however, had been qtrengthened by the resolu- tion. Not only had he a strong party at his back-though clearly not quite a solid party--but he was left free to make whatever moves he deemed desirable to attain the end which the Nationalist party clearly desired to reach : namely, to appear to give effect to the Bendigo pledge, and at the same time enable the existing Government to remain in oftice with the same Prime Minister presiding over it. On Tuesday morning, January Sth, Mr. Hughes waited upon the Governor-General. An official announcement stated that he had tendered his resignation, but at the request of His Excellency would continue the administration pending the issue of a new commission. A memorandum afterwards coniniunicated to Parliament IJY the Governor-General stated that Rlr. Hughes “offered no advice as to who should be asked to form an administration.” In the course of the day a succession of taxi-cabs deposited their political occupants at the doors of Government House. Next after Mr. Hughes came Rfr. Tudor, who subsequently said that the Goveriior- Genei-a1 had asked him for advice, and that he had “made “on. Sir Austin Chapman, K C.M.G. hI.L.A, N.S. Wales, 18gIfIgor; member of C’wealth House of Reps., 1901/26. Minister for Defence, 1g03f4’ Postmaster. General 1go5/7’ Minister for Trad; and Customs. 1908. 1g=j/24,’ for Health. 1ga3/rj: Of Braidwood, N.S W.; b. Bowral, N S W, IO July, 1864. Died. IP Jan, 1926. 433 AUSTRALIA DURING THE WAR [8th Jan, 1918 certain suggestions,” but had not been commissioned to form an administration. As Mr. Tudor did not command a majority in either House, the difficulty involved in commis- sioning him to form one was apparent. Then in quick succession came Mr. Cook, Mr. Watt, Mr. Higgs, Mr. Poynton. and Mr. Wise, each furnishing his interpretation of the situation to the Governor-General, who himself had been watching the recent developnients with the closest scrutiny. The person who stayed longest with His Excellency was Sir John Forrest. He arrived at Government House at a quarter past four in the afternoon, and did not leave till a quarter past six; and if there had been a record of his comments they would probably be more interesting than those of the other invited callers. We now know, from the Novar papers, that Sir John pressed his own claims to the Prime Ministership. The Governor-General informed the Secretary of State of the incident in these terms (15th January, 1918) : “ Sir John Forrest was the one dissentient. He treated the practically unanimous vote of confidence given at the party meeting to Mr. Hughes, in which he had joined, as 24ne politesse, having no practical significance. He denounced the Prime Minister’s autocratic ways, frequently reiterating the phrase airt Cat7sar aut ~iikrl,his want of method in the conduct of affairs, and asserted that all real business was hung up in favour of limelight exhibitions on the platform. Sir John ended by offering his services to form a Government, and in support of his claim pointed out his popularity with all classes, including Roman Catholics, the absence of hostility to him personally among the Labour members, and his long experience in the public service.” The Governor-General confessed that he had thought “ that one of the most promising solutions of the problem would have been a Forrest adminis- tration,” provided there was a reasonable prospect of its being approved by the majority in the House of Representatives. “I therefore again sent for Mr. Cook and Mr. Watt, and told them of Sir John’s offer, and asked whether they con- sidered there was any chance of his securing an adequate following.