NOTES OF THE DAY

Dominion, Volume 18, Issue 96, 18 January 1924, Page 6

NOTES OF THE DAY

Members of the Main Highways Board are about to tour the Dominion in order to confer with local bodies and with district highway councils. This should mean an early completion of preparations for bringing the Highways Act into practical operation at the beginning of April next. Apparently the objections at first raised to a national highways scheme have in great part died away, and by the time members of the Highways Board have carried out their plan of visiting separately all parts of the Dominion the benefits the scheme offers should be everywhere understood. The best of all methods of popularising the Highways Act, however, undoubtedly is to put it as soon as possible into full working operation. Good roads, as they are constructed, will carry their own sufficient recommendation, and it will soon be regarded as ridiculous to raise any' objections to the systematic methods which are indispensable in order that these invaluable aids to progress may be provided economically and expeditiously. Although much effort necessarily must be concentrated on preliminary planning and organisation, tho Main Highways Board should take the earliest opportunity of demonstrating what can be done by modern plant and methods in the construction or improvement of the several classes of roads with which it will henceforth be concerned.

A timely and practical proposal made by the British I rime Minister in the course of the Address-in-Reply debate id the House of Commons had reference to the treatment of urgent national problems like unemployment and the encouragement of agriculture. In such political conditions as have arisen in Britain, Ma. Baldwin suggested, it was advisable that representatives of all parties should meet at a round-table-conference and endeavour to agree upon methods of dealing with problems of all kinds. On its merits this proposal should command approval. Provided always that some check can be imposed on party prejudice and animosities, it offers a hopeful means of overcoming some of the disabilities arising out of the conditions of three-party and group politics that are developing in Britain and other parts of the Empire. A minority Government in Britain will be faced by an all but impossible task in dealing with problems like unemployment and the revival of British agriculture. On the other hand, these problems are so grave, and so imperatively demand treatment, that a conference of party representatives would have a strong incentive to seek agreement on methods of dealing with them. At the same time agreement in these circumstances would offer some assurance of continuity in vital aspects of policy. Mr. Baldwin’s suggestion is one that deserves consideration not only in Britain, but in other parts of the Empire. ' The idea he has put forward is soundly constructive. It would undermine only the tiresome convention under which a political party opposes almost as a matter of course anything proposed or submitted by its competitors. Optimistic reference was made in the King s Speech at the open-, ing of the British Parliament to the proposed Anglo-American agreement in regard to the illicit importation of liquor into the United States. American opinion is by no means enthusiastically unanimous over the terms of this agreement, and it is expected that its ratification will meet with considerable opposition. The object of the agreement is to meet the desire of the United States Government to search vessels suspected of smuggling liquor not merely up to the three-mile limit, but within any reasonable distance from the shores of the United States. In return, the American Government to concede to British shipowners the right to carry into American ports under seal liquor for the use of passengers on the return voyage. While the prohibitionists naturally are delighted at tho concession designed to assist the Government in the suppression of smuggling the more extreme element are strongly opposed to the provision enabling British ships to carry liquor for the return voyage. In this they are backed by American shipping interests, which feel that they will be placed at a disadvantage in competition with British lines. It is difficult to gather exactly what weight of opinion there really is behind this antagonism to the ratification of the proposed treaty. The New York 6'wi and Globe, in commenting on the position, suggests that the Anti-Saloon League appears to be “more interested in drying up the British merchant fleet than in enforcing the Federal law within the United States.’’ It adds that it is incredible that more emphasis should be laid upon permission to British ships to retain liquor than upon the very liberal offer of Great Britain to waive its rights beyond the three-mile limit. The New York livening Post, which usually is sound and moderate in its opinions, puts tho position as follows: —

The issue boils down to a simple question. Will prohibitionists insist upon maintaining a restriction upon foreign shipping which was enacted inadvertently and unintentionally, and which puts tho United States in a false position when, by giving it up, we can not only clear our record, bu greatly strengthen prohibition enforcement? Answering its own question, the Post expresses the opinion that the great body of prohibitionists will see the position in its proper light, and will not oppose ratification of the treaty.