RANDOM SHOTS

Auckland Star, Volume XLII, Issue 287, 2 December 1911, Page 15

RANDOM SHOTS

Zamil

clash. »*«? trite for fnu. nf the most remarkable things ! 000 It elections is that the m-are, <to them the less trouble yot '"f lined to take about them. J £*S of people who starlet *'* , months ago with immense •f.; d u m pon the congenial task o, candidate, or boom *** * Z.\ creed; and very few ol to be "in at the death.' ****. any sort of enthusiasm is I i,, Pl w ; crn„e m„ keep it up long enough ** if X the electioneering public •"2??*stnet air Of fatigue and s ffcannS a v „. The worst 0 it is Haitnde just no*i. ~ on up tc . Jt .if this sort « n,g publjc peceolier 7tn ' . j , lirn llp llt the * ""I th* ' uul. after all, I SUP ' lin = SSi da y without any voting r-fiSAJg of * flasco-'-llam Sorthegfoomy Dane wouldn't J.^cumstaneetoit. j-£4444444* •_ ;- ii very curious thing— »«" .Vays extremely anxiSe the right of voting when *" l ,!n't -rot it; but as soon as ever we attained the object of their %• « they won't even take the £££, out of doors on a wet day fid their vote. The excuses for , /nth," are nearly as numerous as * n for not going to church, and A, reason lor nut „>. = .. , V about a-, honest. Personally, I Sttieve that even the Suffragettes : , Sord a very high percentage of "to many years in succession if they rat the franchise. I have read some*"re M about a nation that was so enam.jjrf of voting that after it had passed 'jrouch the preliminary stages of manLd suffrage and adult suftom and female franchise, it prided to enact a law giving every- [, oi two votes all round. But that nation certainly didn't resemble the New Ztalaiders in any very oUnous particular. i 44444444* 1 mentioned the Suffragettes in passfa just now, and I can't help slopping in my wild career just to remark "that I m ertremely sorry to observe that they ire so to speak, "at it again." Of course Isfmpathiie with them—l mean, I know tint women ought to have a vote, and I hope that they will get it soon. But I can't help feeling that 'the "militant' method—ringing Ministers' door bells, asaulting prominent politicians, breaking up public meetings, and smashing windows-are not exactly appropriate to the end in view. Of course they do succeed in drawing public attention to their crusade; but the impression they protee is rather to the effect that they are i piffle nuisance. Now this, I submit, is not exactly the reputation that women ought to acquire, for political or any other purposes. There are always a large number of people undecided what to think about such matters who will come to the conclusion that people who deliberately raise riots and break windows are not fit to be trusted with votes. This is not a logical inference of course, it is very characteristic of human nature. And after all what is _ the good of stirring up needless opposition? ±444444444 And while I am talking about the Suffragettes,' I may as well observe that, .with all respect to the many good qualities that their leaders have displayed, they don't seem to have risen superior to "some of the weaknesses exhibited by their male rivals on the political stage. They are as jealous of each other, and flu bitter against each other, as any mere man' of ray acquaintance. Once upon a time Miss Billington was prominent in the movement, and was regarded as a most faithful exponent of the feminist creed. But not long ago she wrote some letters to the "Daily Express" explaining that she and Mrs. Pankhurst had quairelled irrevocably, and that she wouldn't put up with the arrogance of the Pankhurst family any more. Miss Billington asserted that in her opinion the whole Suffragette movement was now being "run" for the glorification of the Pankhursts, and, after handing them over metaphorically to the powers of darkness, she fled from the field. Now, quite recently there has been another squabble in the inner circles of the Feminist Cpuncil as to whether the Unionists are better friends to woman than the Liberals. And, last of all, an amused world has been enjoying the spectacle of a distinguished and titled Tory lady denouncing Mr. Lloyd George «d threatening him with the full weight of Suffragette wrath—obviously and naturally because he is .Mr. Lloyd cor ?e. All of which events are regrettable, 'because they tend to shak.> the confidence of even ardent votaries 01 woman in her "sweet rei.soria'bV<-e=<„," "a they inevitably cause the Philistines l ° blaspheme. '..' 4±iiiiiiii Have you the least idea what a difference the abolition of the pig-tail isgoing ronsake to China? An ingenious person Ms been calculating that a self-respecting Chinaman spends fifteen minutes of his Wn time and thirty minutes of the barber's every time he tends his hair. Each queue costs one cent a day and there arc about 100,000,000 of them' in China. You can easily work out the multiplication fa yourself. Even the saving in clothes now spoiled by constant contact with the oleaginous "pigtail" is set down at £8,000,000 a year. And if you add all the time and money together and reduce it to shillings and pence, you find that China is now spending about £73.000,000 * year on its hair and could save that amount by abolishing the "pigtail." No wonder that the reform movement is causing a revolution in the Celestial Kingdom. A thing that strikes the visitor to China is the scantiness of the hair of many of the Celestials with the longest pigtails. If a person has a sufficiency of scanty locks to allow of braiding in alength'of silk cord, he may luxuriate in a pig tail that almost reaches his feet. Except on close examination it is difficult to say what is hair and what braid. As long as John Chinaman maintains his pigtail so lons will he remain impervious to Western influences.