A QUESTION OF JUDGMENT.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 275, 17 November 1905, Page 4

A QUESTION OF JUDGMENT.

Whatever Mr Seddon's opponents may think or say about his politic*, no one has much doubt about the good* ness of his heart; and we .did not n»ed the evidence supplied by his Helensviile speed, to assure us that his sympathies ore always on tbe side of the suffering, irrespective of race or creed. The whole colony joins with the Premier in his expression of sympathy far the Russian Jews, who are still suffering horrible barbarities at the hands of their brutal tyrants. Nor do we think that anyone Would accuse the Premier of exaggeration in his description of the miseries now being endured by the masses in the two countries, in which for widely different reasons we take so deep an interest—among the peasants in famineHStricken Japan and among the Unemployed in England, It is well for ns, living In peace and prosperity, to attempt to realise now and then the terrible contrast between our own lot and that of those whose lines have not fallen in such pleasant places. And it should not be enough to offer words only as a proof of our fellow-* feeling for any human beings whcSe woes we can help to relieve. These colonies have never been alow or niggardly in their charities, and Whenever ] an appeal ia made to tbe philanthropy and humanity of the men and women of British race, we believe that it will not fall on deaf ears. But unless charity is governed by discretion the evils which it hopes to mitigate may only be increased. In any case, kindness of heart and sensitiveness to human suffering can never be accepted as an excuse for doing tlie right thing in the wrong way; and we venture to think that Mr Seddon's sympathetic and generous impulses are just now leading him into serious danger of committing this parti-filar error.

We refer, of course, to the Premier's j proposal that this colony should despatch ships loaded with provisions for ' the relief of the starving peasants in Japan, and the unemployed '"proletariat" in England. Though we approve heartily of the Premier's purpose in each of these cases, we think that this is not the right way to set about the business. As to England, no doubt there is a great deal of want and distress among the lower classes, and there will probably be more as winter goes on. But it must be remembered that there are immense charitable organisations already engaged in distributing relief to the destitute in the metropolis and elsewhere; and that it is hardly necessary for us to take work out ot their hands. We see no reason why these colonies should not contribute toward the great funds already established in England for tbe assistance of the "submerged tenth;" and no doubt such contributions would be no less welcome than useful. But there are two manifest objections to the proi posal that we should ship food to Lon--1 don for tbe "workless workers" of tbe East End. In the first place it would

be tbe most expensive and cumbersome

way that we could choose of offering assistance. If we send money it can be spent to far greater advantage on the spot hy the organisations which have already Undertaken the work of distribution of Charitable aid. But, secondly, and this appears to nfl the

more serious aspect of tbe question, we

think that England and Englishmen may justly resent even tbe best intehtioned philanthropic efforts in such a guise as this; To put it bluntly, it is not for us to offer a pauper's dole to the poor of England, and We believe that we would not only consult better for our own dignity but render any aid that we decide to give far more Useful and acceptable if we offered it in the form of pecuniary subscriptions to the funds already devoted to the laudable purpose of relieving the unemployed. The same argument, we need hardly point out, applies with even stronger force to the case of Japan. We believe

that the people of this colony feel genuine admiration for our gallant allies, and sympathy for them in the sufferings produced by the failure of their crops and the heavy sacrifices entailed by the war. More than this, we are convinced that an appeal to the people of this country on behalf of the Japanese relief funds would meet With a prompt and generous response. But we do not think that it would be a wide or dignified course for us to ship food to Japan as a gift to the starving peasants. What money we send can be more profitably employed by the Japanese Government than by us. And our allies, sensitive and high-spirited as they are, might be expected to resent the offer of such help as Mr Seddon is inclined to give. When Port Arthur fell the Japanese authorities politely but peremptorily rejected the supplies and medical comforts forwarded to the captured town by the British Admiralty; and the subsequent i apology for their abruptness could: not disguise the fact that their sense of patriotic self-respect was wounded by England's well-meant offer. For these reasons we think it would be distinctly unwise to send gifts in kind to Japan. By all means let bur Government organise relief funds to help the British unemployed or the Japanese peasants or the Russian Jews, Any, or all, of these objects are deserving of all the assistance that We can give; and the success of our Indian Famine Fund and other similar movements in past years proves that appeals to this country for such purposes are never made in tain. But we should be Careful to regulate our charitable impulses by calm reflection. and it does hot deem that the course

proposed by Mr Seddon in these instances Would be either the most economical or the most judicious or the most acceptable that we could adopt.