The Press. MONDAY, JUNE 10, 1895. THE UNEMPLOYED.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 9126, 10 June 1895, Page 4

The Press. MONDAY, JUNE 10, 1895. THE UNEMPLOYED.

The Premier deserves credit for the clear and outspoken manner in which he dealt with the unemployed question on Saturday. Ministers, he said, were bound by law in the administration of public funds. They were not in a position to spend money not authorised by Parliament; but they were quite willing and anxious to do everything in their power to relieve the distress of those who found themselves without work and without the means of maintaining their families. The only way in which, within the limits of the law, Government could come to the aid of the unemployed in any locality was in the form of subsidies granted to the Charitable Aid Board in the shape of £ for £ raised locally. Mr. Seddon, however, admitted the gravity of the position. He stated that notwithstanding the fact that £20,000 had been expended on cooperative works, and in addition three months' expenditure at the same rate, the difficulty still continued. He scouted the- idea that the evil was to any extent intensified by the action of the employers. He did not believe that, as a general rule, employers refused to give work simply in order to make matters more difficult for the Government. Such an idea is, of course, too absurd to be entertained for a single moment, although it has been industriously propagated in the columns of the Ministerial Press; and Mr. Seddon's repudiation of the theory should teach these partisan journalists a wholesome lesson. However there is no denying the fact that notwithstanding the large expenditui*e of the Government on works intended for the relief of the unemployed the difficulty still exists, and is pressing for prompt grappling with. This is not the time to inquire into the causes which have brought about the present dearth of employment. Rather it is the duty of everyone to give careful attention to any scheme which may at least temporarily mitigate the suffering of many of their fellow citizens.

We may say at once that we entirely agree with Mr. Seddonui the view that it is impossible for the general Government of the country to grapple unaided with the unemployed difficulty. This problem has exercised the minds of statesmen in all parts of the world without meeting with a satisfactory solution. Without entering at length on well-worn points of discussion, we cannot refrain from reminding the public that if it were once admitted that the Government was to beheld responsible for the provision of labour for every man or woman out of work, the colony would speedily become the happy hunting ground for the thriftless, the witless and workless from every part of the world. The

task of providing work for all and every adult male or female who applies for it is so utterly beyond the power of any Government, much les? the Government of so small a co__munity as New Zealand, that as a question of policy it should be abandoned at once. As Mr. Seddon frankly admitted on Saturday, the attempt to do something of this kind had already brought discredit on the colony and on the party to which he belonged, and he was determined not to fall into the same error again. We do not deny that every effort should be made to relieve the necessitous, for we hold that even a dog should not be allowed to die of hunger and cold, much less a human being. We hold that even the thriftless, the witless, aye, even the drunkard, much less the deserving amongst the workless, should not be permitted to suffer from the want of food. But we contend that the duty of society should mainly be to keep such from absolute starvation, and not that it should provide them with constant employment at full wages. There are many cases of men and women, who are both able and willing to work, who find it at times difficult, if not impossible, to meet with employment. But no thoughtful man who is acquainted with New Zealand can deny that in the great majority of cases men and women who are sober, industrious, and able to work can unemployment in the ordinary walks of life without having to depend on public or private charity. It is a fact which cannot be gainsaid that the vast majority of the workless in young countries like New Zealand are in that position through faults which were within their own control. And if this be so, why should the public be asked to do more than merely help them to keep the wolf from the door : The difficulty is that when the community are moved. into action about .deserving cases of men or women who are anxious and able to work, but who, through misfortune at some stage of their life, are without the means of existence, kindhearted people are apt to lose their heads, and proceed to declaim against a condition of society which makes such things possible. But the cases of distress amongst the industrious are the exception, not the rule, and, therefore, it would be folly to attempt the impossible task of providing work for all comers, because a few cases of distress are inevitable in our midst. In fact, while we deplore those unfortunate cases such as we have mentioned, we maintain that to admit the principle that the Government must find work for every man and woman who applies for it- would result in incomparably more serious disasters than those which it was intended to remedy. Let us, however, take a practical view of the difficulty which is before us in Christchurch. We have always maintained that indiscriminate charity is a mistake, and that on principle no relief should be granted to the able bodied except in exchange for work. But instead of looking to the Government for everything, we believe that a public subscription, subsidised by the local bodies, could be organised to an extent which Would relieve the present pressure. A year ago we suggested a method for meeting the unemployed difficulty during last winter. We now repeat it in a modified form. Our proposal is that -6500 be raised by public subscription, which should be subsidised by £500 from the local bodies. This /fund would suffice to find 100 men with ten weeks' work at £1 per week. Now, although £1 per week is not sufficient remuneration for the work of a good man, it is sufficient to keep the wolf from the door for a necessitous person until the winter is over. Our suggestion is that if £500 were subscribed by the publio, the local bodies representing the city and the suburbs might provide another -500. Thus the City Council might contribute £200 and the Sydenham, St. Albans, and Lin- ! wood Borough Councils, and say the Avon and the Riccarton Road Boards might provide the other £300. The local bodies should have handed to them from the £500 subscribed by the public a sum equal to their own contributions. With the £1000 so distributed amongst these city and suburban bodies work could be given to 100 men for ten weeks. There would, of course, be no difficulty in finding work to do in the way of making necessary improvements in the city and the suburbs. The public subscribers of the £500 might be given tickets each representing an order for a week, i.e., £1 worth of work* Then when an appeal for assistance was made to a subscriber he could hand the applicant a ticket or order for a week's work on one of the local bodies. Thus if the City Council contributed £200 a like sum of £200 from the public subscription would be handed to it, by which means forty men could be provided with work at £1 per week for te|i weeks. And so on with the other bodies. We unhesitatingly assert that no difficulty would be met with in raising £500 if the matter were taken up in the right spirit. Four winters ago we raised nearly £600 without any difficulty, and surely when one institution was successful in raising so large a sum £500 could be readily obtained if the matter were taken up with a will by the public.

MB. HAWEIS. It is not creditable to the taste and judgment of the people of Christchurch that the lectures delivered by Mr, Haweis last week were not better attended. Had the performance at the theatre last week been in the nature of what 13 known as a leg show, or an exhibition of lurid melodrama, or a series of addresses by a religious quack, the theatre would have been full to overflowing, and the curled darlings of Society of both sexes would have been conspicuous by their presence, instead of notable by their absence. The colonies owe a good deal to Mr. R. S. Smythe, that enterprising purveyor of celebrities, and we question if he has ever before brought along a lecturer better worth hearing than Mr. Haweis. We are sorry that Christchurch does not respond better to the efforts of those who provide us with high-class shows. Fortunately the people in some of the other towns of this colony have so much more good sense and good taste

that they make up for our deficiencies. Mr. Haweis is a man of sufficient notability in many ways to be worth listening to, if only in that spirit of intelligent ouriosity which inspires all persons with any literary or intellectual leaning to see men whose sayings, doings or writings have made them famous. He is one of the most distinguished of the free lances of the Church of England, and as has been shown in our columns during the past week has been a leader in various movements which commend themselves to the warm sympathies of all liberal-minded men. He has, moreover, had the advantage of having lived for many years past on terms of more or less intimacy with a great many of the most erniment men and women of his time. The man whose privilege it is to see much of distinguished and gifted people must indeed be of very dull perceptions if he does not benefit by the intimacy and acquire some slight admixture of their charm. If he can but boast of a retentive memory, his reminiscences alone will give him much that is interesting to tell. Mr. Haweis is not an orator in the ordinary sense. We should describe him as a very gifted talker, with a strong tendency to the humorous side of things. Much of his lectures consisted of talk almost as unconventional in form as private conversation. They were lighted up with much admirable fooling in the shape of mimicry, good stories and dry humour of various kinds. But there were interspersed amidst all this fun and talk not a few passages of genuine eloquence. We cannot doubt that if Mr. Haweis had been'destined for the stage instead of for the Church, he would have attained great eminence in his profession. It goes without saying, we hope, that Mr. Haweis said not a word in any one of his four lectures which in the least degree bordered upon the indelicate, and nearly all that he said, ranging from serious

eloquence to low comedy, was permeated with the spirit of that saving common-sense which is perhaps the highest as it is the most useful form of wisdom. To those who have for a long time had to content themselves as far as lecturing goes with the efforts—praiseworthy efforts no doubt—of local amateurs, which consist of the sonorous reading of rotund sentences conveying well-meant platitudes, it must have been quite a revelation to learn how effective clever conversational talk—if we may use the term —can ba made on the platform, proceeding from a man who has seen and read much, and has, therefore, something to say worth saying.