NOTES OF THE DAY

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 271, 10 August 1920, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY

Bolshevism is a phenomenon whose attractions seem to vary for Labour leaders in proportion to tliofr distance from it. Mr. Tom Shaw, M.i\, anil Sir. Be-. Turner, the two members of the British Labour delegation to Russia who returned with the interim report in J UM \ a!it , made no secret of the fact that they did not like Bolshevism. This morning- ,tji o cable messages announce a similar condemnation by the International Lnbou>Conference at Geneva. Sir. Shaw de-clares-that Trotsky, who is now a soldier first and foremost, has always' before Mm the historic parallel-ai'ter the French Revolution, Napoleon; after the Russian, Trotsky. If Trotsky is victorious in his Polish campaign, Sir. Shaw is of opinion that anything may happen in Russia. * * * n Another addition to the cost of living was made by the waterside workers yesterday in holding up the business of the port. Although calls for labour were made.by tho employers there was no response from the watersiders, and in most cases shipping remained at a standstill. Although some showers fell, cargo could have be«n worked throughout the greater part of the day. The moral of tlreso continual stoppages seems to be that the more pay the waterside labourers get tho less work they are prepared to do. Mankind, the pessimists tell us, will work only when the wolf is at the door. This does not imply a high estimate of human nature, but the change that has come over Wellington's waterfront during recent years is difficult to account for -on any other basis. » » » « How much longer is the city's excellent municipal milk schomo to suffer from the vauarios of tho No. 1 Milk Distributing Company? Mr. Bodloy haa refused to deliver milk to the consumer's door, but now tries to insist, that tho consumer mus; come to the Bodloy doorstep to pay his bill. This is having it both ways with a vengeance. The City Council has granted tho vending companies? a monopoly of tho business for two years, and tho public in No.- 1 District apparently luio no option but to submit to the edicts of Sir. Bodley or go without milk. It theroforo looks to the City Council to sec that this irritating pin-pricking is promptly and finally ended. The effrontery of the present drauind ifl particularly glaring, in yipir I

oi the fact that in many cases the No. 1 Company has refused to deliver milk at the door, and consumers aro thus givon no opportunity of discharging their bills, on the spot. Mr. Bodley is mistaken Jf lie thinks that incidents of this sort will lead the public to consider the municipal milk scheme a failure. These irritations are leadiug the public to quite another conclusion, and ono not.at all favourable to the continued participation of Sir. Henry Bodley in the scheme.

What can a euccessful barrister cam at the Bar in London? This question has been raised by 6omo inquiries made in tho House of Commons as to the salary and fees paid to the British AttorneyGeneral, Sir Gordon Hewart. It was ascertained that these totalled the tidy sum of ,£19,533 for the year, being made «P of"salary ,£7OOO and fees .£12,533. A member wished to know whether tho At-torney-General fixed the fees himself, and Kir Gordon Hcwart explained that he had no sav in the matter. In reply to another questioner he staled that a barrisj ter in private practice would receive twiM as much for work of similar amount and difficulty. This presented a view of barristers with incomes per annum soaring up to JBIO.OCO and over. On the next question day a member was moved to ask tho Government to extend the excess profit? duly to the legal profession. A correspondent of the London "Times" followed this by declaring that barristers who make over JCSOOO arc very fo'v in number indeed. In support, he pointed out that there was scarcely one to be found who would not gladly abandon the pursuit of fees for a steady -£5000 a.Tear for life on the Bench. This pessimistic view may havo been induced by .the spectre of tho excess profits duty. Still, even the much-discussed .£40.000 is a long way below Charlio Chaplin's .£IOO,OOO a year, and leaves the lap well in the rear as a money-making occupation.