NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1389, 15 March 1912, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

« The labour troubles which have bnen increasingly manifest in so many countries during thr> last, few months are. sometimes spoken uf as a sort of epidemic, and when one •considoi'B Qa£ widely differing condi-

tions amid which they break out, and the variety of the occasions of strife, it is not unnatural to drop into this way of speaking. Even Japan is now affected. There was a tramway strike at Tokio during tin; New Year holidays, and the Japan Herald thereupon, quite in Western style, headed an article "The Coming Struggle Between Capital and Labour." Tho strike was looked upon by tho Herald as the precursor of "the formation of many strong labour Minions, the weakening of the power of bureaucracy, and the growing earnestness of the people in regard to the difficult problem of earning a living, which they have hitherto considered it infra diij. to discuss." Tokio seems to have witnessed some of the phenomena of a "sympathetic strike," for a 'rikisha man, when hailed in the ordinary way by a citizen desiring a ride, "turned round and cast a curious, wondering look at him as if ho were an imbecile and passed on without vouchsafing a word." Such behaviour must have been rather shocking among people to whom the most deferential politeness is a second nature. In fact, that "curious, wondering look" seems to speak whole volumes of Basin _ Beservc declamation. The immediate cause of the strike seems to have been dissatisfaction with the division of .certain funds "remaining over from the old company" after tho tramway system had been acquired by the municipality. The employees thought they had not received their share, and that some of the directors of the old company had had too much. Finally, these directors agreed to surrender £20,000 of their bonuses, and this is said to have had "a very favourable effect on the strikers." The police kept order, and the strike was over in three days. It is-a curious fact in British politics that a number of prominent members of both the largo parties have at different times changed sides. If this is a fault, each party is so vulnerable that references to the inconsistencies of an opponent's career arc weapons that may easily damage the user or his associates. Thus Sin Edward Carson, the leader of tho Ulster Unionists, said tho other day that Mn. Winston Churchill was a turncoat, and that loyal Ulstormcn detested the turncoat. Mn. J. M. IIoiiEHTSON, M.P., retorted with the inevitable tu quoquc. Sin Edward Carson had admitted that ho was formerly a Liberal, but had explained that the moment he found Gladstone going in for Home Rule ho telegraphed to have his name taken off tho books of the National Liberal Club. Mn. Robertson could find no fault with that, but ho charged Sir Edward Carson with turning Tory for the rest of his life. "Liberalism'is not summed up in Home Ilulo; there are a hundred other policies he, as a true Liberal, should have had at heart." In contrast to this dark picture, Mr. Bobertson placed tho shining career of Mr. Winston Churchill. "He had the fortune to be driven out of the Tory party by that party's unwisdom'and unscrunulousness, and since leaving it had, bit by bit, following an inherited instinct for democracy, become an out-and-out Liberal." Evidently, in Mr. Robertson's opinion, it is praiseworthy for a Conservative to turn Liberal, but reprehensible fdr a'"Liberal to turn Conservative. "One has gone forward," he said, "and-the other has gone backward, that is the difference"—a statement with which even his opponents might_ agree, while reserving their own opinion as to which was the "ono" and which the "other," which the convert and which the pervert. Mr. Robertson was on firmer ground when ho spoke of tho meaning of "turncoat." "It isi a word easily thrown out against a man, and its only rational value is as a reproach to anyone who throws over his allegiance to his party for his own immediate pecuniary advantage. Then you can call him a turncoat and a time-server." Wc should think nobody outside the heat of part)' controversy would dream of applying the terms thus defined to the many good men who left the Liberal party on account.of the Home Rule policy, or those who forsook the Conservatives when they became involved in the Tariff Reform movement. Until the introduction of the Home Rule Bill, which Mr. Asquith has promised for just after Easter, there is certain to bo much speculation as to its terms. Wo published on our cable page last Wednesday the Daily Chronicle's forecast, and it is interesting to compare it with that of The Times. The differences are rather striking. ' Thus on one vital matter tho Chronicle says the new Irish Parliament is to have full control of Customs and Excise, subject to the continuance of complete Free-trade between the two countries, whereas The Times forecasts that Irish Customs and Excise will remain under Imperial control. The Government also intends, according to The Times, _ that "very liberal financial provision should be made by the Imperial Exchequer to meet the difference on the wrong side between Irish revenue and expenditure." Tho Chronicle is more definite, and says that Ireland is to receive an Imperial subsidy of ■ £2,000,000 per annum for 15 years, and that this subsidy may be in the nature of a lump sum or an annual subvention. The Times, however, states that "the idea that the Irish Exchequer should be started with a lump sum is now discredited in wellinformed circles, and it is expected that the Imperial contribution will take the double form of an annual grant as well as responsibility for certain Irish charges." Both papers agree that there will be a reduced Irish representation at Westminster. The Times places the number at "about seventy," as against the present 103 Irish members of the House of Commons, and expects that their activities will be limited by an "In-and-out" Clause. Touching one important matter not mentioned by the Chronicle, The Times expects that the. Bill will provide, for Irish land purchase to remain an Imperial obligation. Of all these questions, that of the control of Customs and Excise, which represents four-fifths of . the tax revenue now collected in Ireland, inay be found the most difficult In settle. The Government in 1909 decided for Imperial control, but a Committee of Experts which it appointed is understood to have reported— though its findings have not been published—in favour of Irish fiscal autonomy. Those who look to the establishment of a Federal system for the United Kingdom would withhold the control of Customs and Excise from any of the local Parliaments, hut it is pointed out that if the House of Commons retains this power it must have a number of Irish renresfiitativi's. and th" result wfuld be that 111- fate of an Imperial Administration might be nt their mercy. Nationalist opinion on

the subject of fiscal autonomy is divided, bi;t it is thought that a Home Rule Bill without fiscal autonomy wculd be rejected by an Irish National Convention. Some compromise may be found, and it is just possibb that, as part of the adjustment, all provision for Irish represcntatioa at Westminster may be struck out.