NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1065, 2 March 1911, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

We arc told to-day that Mr. Winston Churchill is being bombarded in the House of Commons with inquiries respecting the whereabouts of "the old shepherd of Dartmoor." This dear old gentleman is already a historic figure. He first became famous when Mr. Lloyd-George, in his speech at Mile End during the general election, referred, apparently as proof of the wickedness of the House of Lords, to the poor old man who was "sentenced to thirteen years' penal servitude because, under the influence of drink, he had broken open a church poor-box and stolen 25." Mile, End cried "Shame!" It was afterwards admitted by Mr. Churchill that this pour old fellow had previously spent ;);s years in prison, for he was an incurable thief and vagabond. His latest sentence, moreover, had been only three years' penal servitude, to be followed by reformative detention. Ho was released from gaol Jiowe.verj on undertaking to. remain,

for six months on a farm, and in two (lavs lie bolted, and he has not been heard of since. The most delightful commentary upon the affair that we have seen was a very unexpected one. _ Wc found it, not in a newspaper editorial or in a political speech, but in a lengthy report of a case heard in the Central Criminal Court in London oil January M last, a few days after Ml!. CmrncMMi released the poor old man upon whom Mr. Lloyd-George vests his case against the Veto. The prisoner in this case cross-examined one of the police witnesses: Prisoner: You say I made some remark about Winston Churchill, or, as you say, Mr. Churchill ?—Yes. Arc you sure you have omitted nothing or added nothing to it?—l have u=ed your own words. You say I said: "Wait until the Ist. of January and then things will bo different. Mr. Churchill is going to alter things then, and we shall have a butter chance of not being worried by you people." Are you sure I did not use the words "hounded down by you people while wo are trying to get an honest living" ?—2s T o. This victim of the Veto, who calls Mr. Churchill "Winston," was being charged with attempted murder and armed burglary. He was found guilty, and as he had committed similar offences in the past, he was sentenced to penal servitude for life. The two cases make an excellent criticism, not only of the lawlessness that profits from Radical sentimentalism—the doucc hinnanite (to quote Burke) of the Jacobins— but of the methods by which Mr. Lloyd-George appeals to the Mile End mob to destroy the Constitution.

Some very queer rites were performed yesterday in connection with tho Prime-Minister's impending departure to London. The public, although it is liable to take for granted the most extraordinary ideas and to regard as quite normal and natural many things that' would stagger a visitor from any other part of the world, has still a sense of humour, and it will laugh heartily fit the stupid snobbery of tho good people who sought to make yesterday—Ash Wednesday—a great day of homage to Sir- Joseph Wakd. To begin with, there was the touching ceremony with which the National Provident Act was launched. This was a harmless enough affair, although it is a, little disquieting to discover that the public's servants can make themselves so ridiculous—as if the Act could not come into force without the humourless ceromony that a photographer was engaged to record for future histor-. ians. . In the afternoon a garden party, arranged by some unknown supporters of the Government, was held, and this, _ too, was harmless enough. There is no reason why the party should not hold festivals of the sort. But it was thought necessary to order that most of the public offices should be closed for the greater part 'of the afternoon. Whether this was ordered that the attendance at the party might be enlarged, or whether it was the outcome of some incomprehensible feeling that a' "Liberal" garden party is a sacred event, like a great national joy, or a great national calamity, wo do not know. But we do know that the public's anger and disgust arc greater than its amusement. For the impertinence of tho proceeding is greater than the ineptitude of it. It really surprises us that the Prime Minister, who, we assume, could have had the offices kept open, should have failed to realise that the immediate reflection of tho public would be that which Mr. von Haast (whoso protest, one of many wo have received, we print in another column) put into these word 3; "Is the Civil Service the service of the country and managed for the public benefit, or are its members the servants of, and ..existing for the benefit , and glorification of, the Prime Minister' arid his colleagues ?" It was a fitting finale to. the day that the Mayor of the city was not thought important enough to preside over tho banquet in the evening.

There is a point in connection \vith_ the invitation of members of Parliament to witness the Coronation that must not be overlooked. The invitation was from a "committee of both Houses of Parliament" in Britain, and was extended to "eight members of the Dominion Parliament." The Parliament, as everybody knows, consists of the Legislative Council and the House of Representatives, but the Prime Minister apparently has read the invitation as ruling the Legislative Council out of it. 110 appears to have sent his circular covering the message only to members of the House of Representatives, and has obtained no acceptance. Sir Joseph Ward owes the public an explanation of his strange action in leaving the Legislative Council out in the cold. A correspondent in this issue names Sin Charles Bowen and the Hons. J. D. Ormond and E. C. J. Stevens as men whom it would not only bo proper, but almost, imperative, to have amongst our Parliamentary representatives, and we commend his reasoning, with which most people will agree, to the notice of the public. Sir Cuari.es Bowen is, wo believe, at present in England and will bo there during the Coronation festival. He would doubtless bo glad to represent our Parliament, and the New Zealand public would be unanimously delighted to have him as a representative. Sir Joseph Ward should explain to tho public why he has censored, in action, tho invitation from the British Parliament.