NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1033, 24 January 1911, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

»-— The controversy over Mr. Foster Eraser's excellent book on Australia is recalled by the advice cabled today that Mn. Eraser has rpplicd to •'hia ;critieq ;in a letter to a Sydney newspaper. There is no need, so far as candid' readers of tho book are conccrnccr; 'for ft'in, Fraser to protest that what he wrote was written in all friendliness. His affectionate admiration of the country and its people was clear through all his criticism; and his criticism Was as shrewd as it was mildly phrased, as wo noted at the time. His great fault was his failure to understand that tho Australasian democracy has been led by its oily Cleons to believe that the first duty of patriotism is self-esteem. Ho was foolish enough, coming from a country whose people ■ generally criticise themselves only to hnd fault, to imagine that the Australian public would endure anything but gross, flattery. What is thus implied of Australia is true of a large section of the New Zealand public. Indignation is always expressed in some quarters whenever it is reported that somebody has caused the publication abroad of facts about New Zealand which are not of the'sort that the Prime Minister would approve. Much of this indignation is tactical: it is felt to be impolitic to leave, unchallenged anything that may disturb what is amusingly believed to be the general opinion of the world that New Zealand is in all ways perfect; How worthless' is the common resentment of any wholesome. criticism of this country and its people by a candid friend may be deduced'' by anybody from the methods of the Prime. Min'He actually belioves—at any rato he;is always suggesting—that it is a crime against. the country, or, rather, against the financial credit of the country, to say that, he governs .it abominably,. Ho has even threatened to legislate against criticism. When he can with impunity talk rubbish like that, is it .any wonder that the people who tolerate him cannot tolerate wholesome truth?'

An articlo which we print in another column. shows that the Parisians have had a gooct'deal'of amusement out of the "French Government's endeavours to' 'protect its match - manufacturing monopoly against, the,competition, of, the, portable,. cigarrlighter. . there is a soriouß lesson to bo learnt from' these rather comic' proceedings. It is apparent that the French State-made matches are bad and deal', and the manufacture is a burden on the community and a check on tho progress of invention. When it was suggested in the Chamber of Deputies that. the. State, in order to preserve its had only to manufacture better matches, the Government had no reply. Why, indeed, should the State take trouble to improve its product when it can by legislation % force-' the consumer to use no other? The dearness' of the matches"is indicated by the astonishing ..survival of the ancient, and clumsy fire-producing.appliance of the flint and steel. And while, on the one hand, tho poor man is condemned to carry an antiquated tinder-box, the, Parisian until lately dared not be seen with a handy, up-to-date appliance such as the people of every other country are free to enjoy. The cigar-lighter may legally bo used now, but. its price is increased by an import drily of 100. per cent.,- and excise to correspond. Thus the French people are burdened with inconveniences and taxes for the sake of preserving a particular State industry.- Whenever a Government invades the proper sphere of private enterprise, or undertakes .to place any industry beyond .the reach of competition, similar results must follow. In this particular in-stance,'--France'.' has .combined two mistakes—State Socialism .and ■• a' drastic protective tariff—and-as both are among ■ tho popular delusions of this country, the objectlesson should be of special- value here. .-•»-■..

Electors who contemplate supporting the' Labour candidates at the coming municipal elections would do well to consider the occurrences which have marked the domination of Labour in the local affairs of Broken Hill. "Matters cannot' be worse than under. the existing regime," is the summing-up of a correspondent of-,the Sydney,. Morning Facts-which he quotes indicate- that; the', condition .of : themunicipal'.finances.. is: one. ■ of'.chaos. The balance-sheet :>.for■■'l9o9 has not yet been-submitted-to the 1 Local Government Board, as required by law. An official examiner l had to pay a visit to Broken Hill, and the result of his report was the introduction of an accountant to reorganise the municipal ' office.'. -Further trouble arose, and the accountant left. The Mayor persistently refused to allow the press to publish, or «ven to see, the examiner s report on the finances, and even some of the aldermen declared at a recent meeting of the council that they had. not.seen it. Such scandals' could hardly have surprised' any intelligent burgess who understood the method by which- the Labour Mayors of Broken Hill have obtained office. Nominally, the aldermen choose the Mayor, but the actual process is that tho Labour caucus decides which of the aldermen' shall receive the party's support for the office, and the aldermen members of the party are pledged to vote accordingly. The Mayoralty (according to the correspondent) is regarded by the candißates and the party merely as ah easy billet at £300 a yea.ri As might bo expected, discipline among the council's employees appears to have almost dis--appeared. Evidence taken by a special investigation committee showed that intoxicants werobrought to the sanitary depot practically without restriction, and that matters were made unpleasant for abstainers who declined to share tho cost. When the Mayor gave instructions that intoxicants were not to be allowed at the depot or oh the sanitary carts there was talk of "interference with the liberty of the subjoct," and a deputation from the Municipal Employees' Association waited on the council to demand, the right to havctheir beer. The deputation was supported by two Labour aldermen, one of whom" was Jfayor in 1909. In its ordinary work,' such as street maintenance and scavenging, the Labourcontrolled municipality of Broken Hill appears to be utterly inefficient. The Mavor, it is said, ma.v be seen hobnobbing with' the council's employees, and they do not disguise the fact that they are really his masters. The case of Broken Hill is simply an object-lesson in the sort of results that must follow when administration in the supposed interests of a class takes the place of administration in. the interests of the 'community, as a whole.