NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 815, 12 May 1910, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

Mr. W. P. Reeves's resignation of his post as Financial Adviser to the Government in London has relieved the Government and Parliament of an awkward duty in the coming session. The Prime Minister says that Me. Ueeves, as soon as he became- aware of : the attitude taken up by "a section of the House" with regard to his position in Decembpr last, cabled his resignation as from March 31, although under the terms of his appointment ho could have retained his post until the end of June. The Prime Minister is also good enough to express his opinion that "Mr. Reeves was very badly, treated by the House." The Prime Minister ought to know that the general impression of the public is that the country's interests were not well served in this matter by the Government. But, leaving that aside, we should like to know how it. can bo said that the House treated Me. Reeves badly. True, it rejected the vote of £400 allotted to him,, but it has always been a general belief that Parliament still retains, even if it does not always exercise, the right of seeing that, the country's money is not misspent. The fact of the matter is, we fear, that Sip. Joseph Ward has come to feel that parliament merits his censure whenever it displays a mind of its own. : -jV.it Mr. Reeves was not badly treated by the House. He received from it a tribute greater than any., other that the House could pay him. In his interest the House stultified itself by bowing its knee to the Prijie Minister and,reversing its former decision for no other reason than that tho Prime Minister's majesty was offended. In his interest certain members showed themselves ready to incur the confcmpt of the public. But, in A any oyent, what opinion is the public lilcely to form of the statement that "Mr. Reeves was badly treated" coming from the head of a Government that has ■ done its utmost to prevent tho rendering of justice; not to mention generous treatment, to many deserving petitioners—the Government, to take one instance, that fought- its hardest as long as it could against the compensation of the ■ unfortunate motorman Mr. Barton?

Our conjecture of a .few days ago that the extreme British Radicals would not hesitate to attack King George and to insinuate that his late father was on tho side' of the Government in the constitutional crisis has had a very speedy confirmation. Our cable news of yestcrterday contained a report of some speeches which have been delivered in Germany by the British Labour leaders visiting that country. The Chairman of the Labour party,.Mr. Barnes, actually, stated—a-nd his statements are having a wide publicity in Germany—that the - death of King EmyAiiD "would render worse the position at Homo and abroad." "King Edward," he said, "had indeed not definitely consented to the creation of new Peers, but had declared his desire to do everything satisfactory, towards a settlement. King George V was a friend of the Tories, and honce would he unfavourably disposed towards Germany." His colleague, Mr. Henderson, a former chairman of the Labour party, confirmed these statements. It would be difficult to find terms too strong to apply to such unpatriotic and disloyal remarks as those we have quoted. It would be quite bad enough if their 'authors had so uttered them that, they would havc.no circulation beyond the, shores of Britain, for it is bad to insult and malign the new King anywhere. But, spoken in Germany, the assurance that the King's succession to the Throne is a bad thing for Britain and the world, and that he will' be hostile to Germany, is more than disloyalty; it is treason. For nothing could bo morn traitor-, ous than for a member of the House of Commons falsely to roprcsent his country and his King as enemies of tho people- whom he is addressing. The vast majority of the workingmen of Britain will resent Mr. Barnes's attack on their King more indignantly than any other class of people, for the Socialist Labour leaders in Britain reflect tho work-ing-mail's opinion as little us it is reflected by agitators who claim to lead the Labour movement in this country.