The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1911. CORONATION HONOURS.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1195, 2 August 1911, Page 4

The Dominion. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1911. CORONATION HONOURS.

It was natural that the Press Association's London agent, in telegraphing the Coronation honours, should have confined himself almost entirely to a recital of the Australasian recipients of the various distinctions. Had he restricted his dispatch to the mention of Sir Joseph Ward's unlucky baronetcy and Sir John Fixdlay's hardly-more fortunate knighthood he would have still given us the cream of the list. In. the full list to hand, however— and it is an unusually long and important one, so long and important, indeed, that one only finds Sir J. G. Ward's name after a careful search—there arc many distinctions interesting in another and a pleasant way. On all hands it has been generally praised, although there are notes of inquiry in some of the comments. The public is still sufficiently contented with the lower slopes not to feel greatly excited over the loftiest of the new dignities—the Garters, Thistles, arid St. Patricks —so we shall begin with the new peers. Four of these arc—or were at the time—members of the House of Commons, two being Unionists ami two Liberals. The Liberals were Mr. A. C. Corbett and Mr. T. Gair Ashton, and the Unionists Silt Alexander Acland Hood (the Unionist Whip) and Mr. AkeivjDouolas, Home Secretary in tho Balfour Ministry. The last-name:l becomes a Viscount, and the other three become Barons. There were nineteen Privy Cottncillorships, eleven t being conferred on members of the House of Commons. Of these .six were Ministerialists: Sir Rurt.'S Isaacs, Mr. M'Kinnon Wood, Dit. Macnamara, Mr. Whitley, Mr. J. W. Wilson, and Mr. Charles Fexavick. Five were Unionists: 'jin William Anson, Mr. Bonau Law, Mr. Hayes Fisher, Mrs. Laurenc.': Hardy and Mr. F. E. Smith.

Tho rule of impa-ftidlity which is always observed pretty faithfully by the Government of the day iu 'discharging its delicate duty' of* advising tho King in these matters was carried out on the whole very well. Of the twenty Baronets, seven were active politicians. Foi.tr of those - Mr. E. ■ -Beauchajip, Sir Joiin Bethei,l, Mr. A. A. Hawortii, air. 1 . Mn. A. B. Markham—arc Liberals and three arc Unionists: Major E. F. Coates, Mr. J. B. Lonsdale, and Mr. G. Younger. Of the nine M.P.'s who were raised to knigtithood, five were Liberals and four were Unionists. The Home Government, it is obvious, did not look upon Iho Coronation as an opportunity for securing as many honours for it's party friends as it could, while leaving the members of the other political party out in the cold. Mr. AsQumi,.even without British traditions and his own statesmanlike instincts to guide him, is quite a big enough man to recognise that merit, and worthiness of honour, are as conspicuous amongst his political opponents as amongst his friends. That lv, should have taken any other vie* - , and made recommendations on sotn-:; other (principle than honourable and dignified impartiality—that, in fact, he should have been capable of taking the view and adopting the policy of Sir Joseph Ward—is of course unthinkable. He is an Engl>:,!i statesman, and Sir Joseph Ward is Sir Josr.i'H Ward. Another featur-: of the main list that commands nt tcntion is tho fact that whereas S.-R Josei'.'i Ward recommended, wi'.'i cue exception, only politiehtis for knighthood, the politicians were wit gicatly. in a minority in Mr. AsejriTH's recommendations. .As Ihe Daily Xr'm says, "it would be difficult to put together a more comprehensive list, and one more expressive, of _ the occasion which calls it into being."

I | Sir John Rhys, /ho Professor of I Celtic at Oxford University, has been 111 a.de a Privy Councillor and Dn. OsLEit, the liegius Professor of Medicine at the same University, has been made a Baronet; but most of ths representatives of art and science and letters who have been honoured appear in the list of new knights and they are very numerous. Amongst them are Mr. George Alexander, the famous actor; Mn. Sidxev Li*, the great Shakespearean scholar, and Professor Walter Raleigh, the most vigorous and stimulating of literary critics; Mn. Frask Short, the distinguished worker in mezzotint, and Mr. Claude Phillips, a fine art critic. Pure science has not been honoured, but—a sign of the practical spirit of the age perhaps—there has been no niggardliness in the Royal recognition of applied science. The medical profession is recognised by five baronetcies, five knighthoods, and a K.C.8.; Mr. Arthur Evans, the well-known archaeologist and keeper oE_ the Ashmolean Museum, was knightod; Sin Bovertox Redwood, the engineer and chemist notable for his researches into petroleum, was created a baronet; and Mr. C. A. Parsoks, the inventor of the Parsons turbine, received a K.C.B. The list of honours, it is clear, was as catholic as could be expected' by even the most extreme upholder of the view that Royalty, in distributing its honours to its people, should take fully into account the varieties of activity that go to make up our civilisation. When we in New Zealand read the lists and sec those who have been worthily honoured, and think of those others who might have been honoured as worthily, we only feel the more astonished at the representation of New Zealand.