NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1233, 15 September 1911, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

Our comments on the attitude of the agitator section of the leaders of trades unionism provoked a strong protest from Mix. M'Laren, 51. P., in Parliament yesterday. He appeared to think that he had been personally singlcd out as being prompted in his actions by mercenary motives. This is not so. Indeed so far as we know Mr. M'Laren docs not hold any paid position in trades unionism—he relinquished his office as secretary of the Wharf Labourers' Union some time ago, his Parliamentary duties no doubt necessitating this step. What we took exception to was the spirit underlying such requests a;j were put to the Minister for Labour by Mr. M'Laren, acting no doubt on behalf of, or in concert with, a section of tho leaders of Labour in Wellington. _It is to be regretted that in referring to the matter the member for Wellington East did not quote .the whole of that portion of the article in which the passage he takes exception to appeared. It dealt with the suggestion nut forward that ten per cent, of the members of any union should be permitted to file a dispute under the Arbitration Act in defiance, if necessary, of the wishes of the 90 per cent. composing the remainder of the members of the union. This proposal appears to us simply a monstrous infraction of the rights of the majority in trades unionism. If agreed to it would have a most unsettling effect on trade and industry, and would, we believe, prov( quite as objectionable to the majority of trades unionists themselves as to the general public. The attack made on this journal for its comments was_ just what was to be expected. It is quite natural that those who object to its criticism of their policy and actions should attempt to discredit the paper by every means in their power, and at present they arc in the unhappy position of possessing no better weapon than abuse. The London papers to hand by yesterday's mail bring reports of'the serious industrial disorders in Britain in the early part of August, and it is obvious that the cable messages printed here did not in the least overstatcthe dangers and tragedies of the situation. It was hazarded in The Dominion at the time that the violence of the strikers and the mobs was in large measure due to the effects of what_ may without, risk of misunderstanding be called Lloyd-Georgeism, and the same view, it is worth recording, was taken by the New York I'osl, probably the most thoughtful newspaper in America. The I'osl thus explained why

the height and swiftness of the ferment was attributable to the constitutional struggle: "Tiio victory of the Commons is something move than a victory for tlio democracy; it is a victory wou largely by thy democracy. The Labour members in Parliament liavo shared tho balance of power with tho Irish; and undeniably it has been under pressure from his Labour allies 110 less than, from tlio Irish, that Mr. Asquith was induced more than a year ago to abandon all thoughts of compromise with tho Lords and to como to grips on the ultimate question. It is not only Homo Rule that is involved in tlio victory over tho Lords. A great body of worlcingmen's legislation—tlic Insurance Bill for one item—will profit by tho timing of the Lords. It is inevitable, therefore, that a sen?e of high exultation and self-oonfidcnce should now bo strong among - tho British masses." "The new spirit" amongst British workmen, the Post thinks, is a factor that henceforth must be permanently reckoned with. It was not the ends gained by the Jacobins that stimulated the spirit of disorder, but the methods employed by the Liberal leaders in pursuit of them. Cynical violence in the governors of a democratic country necessarily inclines the masses to disorder in their turn. The exhibition of childishness and petty bickering that disfigured the meeting of the Rugby Union delegates on Wednesday evening last does not promise well for that improvement in Rugby football which its admirers have been hoping for. It is pretty generally admitted that this fine game has not the hold either on the public or on'players that it used to have, and criticism has been freely applied both to the management and to the rules of the game as now played. The decision to hold the meeting of delegates _ to the local union to discuss questions affecting the interests of the game opened up an excellent opportunity for an interesting survey of the position and for tho circulation of ideas and suggestions for bettering things. Instead of this the meeting degenerated into personalities and heated wrangling over trivialities. This is not the way to straighten matters out. There is no doubt that the union and its critics are all anxious to promote the welfare of tho game to which they have pledged their allegiance, and if they would come together and discuss position with this fact kept 'steadily before them it is quite possible that a better understanding would be arrived at and something of value be accomplished. It is of no use, however, talking in a vague and general fashion of mismanagement, and money-grabbing, and need for popularising the game, and so on. What is wanted is definite proposals to bring about the desired improvement. If the Management Committee is not equal to the occasion by all means throw it out; but first oi all make certain that an improvement is going to be made.

While members of Parliament were wrangling over the questions of whether public buildings should be insured and whether they are, as claimed by the Piujie Minister, entitled to come under the heading-of interest earning, a somewhat expensive illustration of the correctness of the view of those who differ with the head of the Government on the latter point seemed likely to be afforded. Sir Jo.SErn Ward, it will be rcmenibered, in his analysis of the Public Debt included some five millions spent on public buildings as interest-earning. •It was contended, on the other hand, that as no depreciation fund existed to maintain the buildings and replace them, and as many which had been built out of the five millions had no doubt already disappeared in smoke, it was not sound finance to treat the whole of the expenditure on public buildings as interest-earning. And while the politicians were disputing the point a public building not a hundred yards from Parliament and adjoining the huge wooden Government offices in Lambton Quay was belching forth volumes of smoke and showing signs of passing rapidly out of existence. As it happens, the brigade saved it. But assuming that the fire had spread to the Government Buildings adjoining it, and that the huge wooden pile had been destroyed, how much of the hundred thousand pounds or whatever it cost would have continued interest-earn-ing? Yet its original cost and the cost of the new building to replace it would under the principle laid down in the Budget both appear in sorae_ future Budget as "interestearning."