NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 843, 15 June 1910, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

■It will doubtless be recollected that the week which ended with the death of King Edward opened with a publishing sensation in which his Majesty's name was involved. This was the recall of the May issue of the Contemporary lieview which contained an extraordinary article on "The Opportunity of the King." The lieview is now to hand. The writer of the article, which was unsigned, declared that in allowing the development of the Constitutional crisis "the King—whether through misfortune or by fault—disappointed the expectations of the nation.' - Discussing the "question as to how the King failed where people believe his mother would have succeeded," the article proceeded to say that his late Majesty was deficient in "high political imagination," that he did not surround himself with wise friends, that he lacked the store of rich experience possessed by his mother, and that he . had, "in short, neither the strong character, the firm, resolute determination, nor the keen interest in political men and political measures which would have added to the. influence always I appertaining to the Throne the immense, undefinable weight of a commanding personality." The article then proceeds to discuss at length the constitutional ethics of the situation. That a review of such a high standing as the Contemporary could allow a contributor to discuss the King with that offensive freedom and indecorum which is all very natural and proper in Mr; Keir Hardib or in the extreme Socialist press was generally considered to be as incomprehensible as it was shocking. The unsold ropies of the issue were speedily withdrawn—a fact that illustrates very clearly the affection and veneration in which the Throne is generally held. That the article could ever have appeared is, on the other hand, the strongest testimony possible to the unbalancing effects of the long political struggle upon generally sane minds. Additional testimony of the same kind is supplied by the opinion of the Daily Chronicle, a careful Liberal journal of high repute, that it could not see in the article anything particularly objectionable.

Some curious and interesting facts about the influence of alcoholism in parents on their children's ability, and technique are given in a recent "memoir" issued by the Francis Galfcon Eugenics Laboratory of the University of London. The statistics relating to Manchester show that the children .of the intemperate are healthier than the children of the sober, and generally heavier and taller. There is, moreover, a greater percentage of consumptive and epileptic children in the families of the sober, and while girls who are born of alcoholic parents die young in greater numbers than the daughters of sober parents, the reverse is the case in respect of boys. These paradoxical results-are explained on the theory that the children of drunkards are more physically fit because it is those who were originally the most robust and physically fit members of the community that have the strongest taste for alcohol. As the report puts it, the fitness of these children is "an indirect effect of heredity, and not a result 'of alcohol." It is obvious, when such results as these are found by the most careful investigations, either that sociological statistics are worth little or that modern ideas about what is "good" and what is-"bad" for the race may be totally incorrect The tragedy is in the fact that while the scientists are groping after the truth about environment and heredity civilisation has to go forward with its work of social reform. And our empirical methods are as likely to be wrong as right. ■

The Minister for Railways had his back to the wall when the deputation from the Manawatu called on him yesterday regarding the Foxton wharf. Me. Millar appears to be making a strong effort to force up the railway returns and to make the figures of his Department more presentable. It is indeed quite a pleasure to see a Minister making a firm stand on any matter just now. But we should like to feel a little more certain than we do at present that in safeguarding his railway revenue Mr. Millar is not doing an injustice to the Manawatu district. The position appears to be a simple one. The Minister for Railways has control of the wharf at Foxton, which supplies practically the whole, or at least a very large part, of the revenue which comes to the port of Foxton. This money he keeps to swell his railway revenue. The Foxton Harbour Board, 'in the interests of the district, desires to improve its port; or at least to keep it in a fit state-, to accommodate shipping. In order to do this it wants to take over the wharf at a reasonable price and use the revenue, therefrom for harbour improvement purposes; or it suggests that the Minister should spend a portion of his-wharf fees on harbour improvement. The Minister refuses both propositions point blank. He says first of all that if he sells the wharf he wants a largo sum for goodwill; and, secondly, if he does not sell (and he does not want to) he will not contribute towards the cost of the maintenance of the harbour which enables him to collect his wharf returns. The truth of the matter is that Mk. Millar looks on the situation from the narrow business point of view of the monopolist. Ho wants to force business to the railways, and any that escapes him that way he levies, toll on through his wharf charges. The interests of the settlers and business people of the whole countryside do not count with him. Ho certainly has the whip-hand in the matter, but wo doubt whether even those who sympathise with his very laudable desire to improve the earning power of the railways will endorse his attitude in demanding the harbour wharf fees without contributing anything towards the cost of keeping the harbour in such condition as will enable vessels, which bring him the fees, to call there with safety. Even a monopolist owes something to the customers he squeezes, and in the present case those customers are settlers and producers whose encouragement it should be the business and pleasure of the Government to concentrate its attention on. ,