NOTES OF THE DAY,

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1166, 29 June 1911, Page 6

NOTES OF THE DAY,

We print elsewhere a letter from Mr. J. li.ott, who sends on behalf of Mas. Ilott and Mit. J. M. A. li.ott cheques to start a subscription in aid of Mrs. Hepple, of Petone, who has lost her husband and two sons under distressing circumstances. The case is a particularly sad one: Mrs. Heppi.e, bereaved of her husband and two eldest sons, is left with seven young children in the face of want. It is one of those tragedies which stir even those who feel acutely the inevitability of such hard strokes of fortune, and arouses a desire in all to join in rendering some material assistance towards the mitigation of the lot of the sufferers. Such appeals can never become numerous enough to dry up the natural fountains of compassion, and in the present case the widow and children can, we feel sure, rely upon the gonerosity of sympathetic hearts. We shall be very glad to receive and acknowledge any additions, small or large, to the generous contributions already to hand through Mr. Ilott. It is noped to obtain a sufficient sum not only to place Mrs. Hepple and her family beyond reach of immediate want, but to enable her to look with some confidence to the future, dark though it may appear to them to-day under the gloom of the tragedy which has robbed them of so much.

. Nobody will be surprised to hear that Me. Jajies Allen's attack upon the Government's payment of special fees to the Chief Justice has attracted notice in Australia. The Australasian, which has no reason to care one way or tho other either for the New Zealand Government or the Reform party, declared very roundly that the principle for which Mr. Allen and Mr. Massey have been contending is a sound one. Discussing the question whether the criticisms should have been uttered in Parliament only, our contemporary points out that "if that rule were insisted upon unwaveringly, it cannot be denied that political leaders would bo greatly hampered" : "A Parliamentary speech is heard by few, and, perhaps, _ read in full by fewer still. Supposing that a wrong is done in policy or administration, a Parliamentarian is at liberty to blazon it forth, not shirking debate in the Legislature, where his strictures can be answered, but not necessarily confining himself to that arena." In further criticism the Australasian says: —

Sir Robert Stout's feputation stands high, anil ho is one of the last men to bo suspected of subservience. Nevertheless it is indisputable that a judge ought to have quitted tho beii":h before ho is eligible to receive monetary rewards of that magnitude from the Government of the day. In Victoria Supremo Court' judges have served readily anil repeatedly as Royal Commissioners, but without any fee being added to their regular emoluments. Mr. Justice iliggmbotham undertook, as a labour of love, the arduous work of consolidating our statute law, -and judges who succeeded him have shown themselves willing to make similar sacrifices. But the conditions in which these services were given and accepted cannot be safely varied.

This is the only view of the case that could'be 'held anywhere outside New Zealand, for, of course, no intelligent person anywhere could help seeing—or, if honest as well as intelligent would shrink from saying— that Mr. Allen has rendered a public service by his courageous criticism of a very noxious infraction of sound principles.

The transactions of the Conference ol' Hospital and Charitable Aid Boards have been so voluminous that they have eaten deeply into our space, but the broad issues raised in tlie discussions are very limited. The now system established by' the Act of 1809 will be allowed, even in a country too prone to regard yesterday as the whole of the Past and tomorrow as the whole of the Future, to be still merely feeling its way. There is therefore little, for the friends of sound and cautious development, to be cither concerncd or alarmed about in the burst of "progressive" enthusiasms in the various motions. . We prefer to take the inclination of the Conference to act like a particularly ardent mcdical-cum-sociological congress as merely evidence of the interest of the boards in their work. Interest and enthusiasm, however, are perilous treasures unless they are united to caution—a little warning that is necessary in view of the advocacy of the medical inspection of school children that was a prominent feature of his Excellency's speech and the Minister's address. Wc are a little, doubtful whether it is quite constitutional for the Governor to appear as an advocate in a question that has a political side. There are in England many sincere social reformers who oppose medical inspection of schools under State auspices on the ground that it will set a precedent that will go dangerously far towards destroying private parental care. The question is as yet, however, only in the stage of speculation. The penalty of the boon of uniformity in hospital and charitable aid administration is the tendency of the new system to extend the range of its concerns; and it was therefore very satisfactory to have the admission of a limit to the Boards' functions in the decision of the Conference to leave city sanitation to city authorities. Their recognition that sanitary inspection in cities is best left in municipal hands may not help the delegates to draw a rough frontier for the boards, but it should help them to feel that a lino must be drawn somewhere. The Conference was assured by the Minister that cconom.y had at last become a feature of the administration of hospitals and charitable aid. There was ccrtainly room for economy, and it would be interesting to have the figures that are said to substantiate the Minister's claim. But . the boards arc to extend their activities as widely as seems to be desired, no exercise of economy will prevent the burden of cost from becoming enormous, and not only enormous,_ but absurd for a country that calls itself "God's own country."