NOTES OF THE DAY

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 250, 18 July 1931, Page 6

NOTES OF THE DAY

It has cost a certain individual, “well-known in Pahiatua Labour circles,” said the report, exactly £5 to discover that a New Zealand Court of Law has no sympathy with a person who “simply refuses on principle”'to pay the unemployment levy. It would have made interesting reading had the defendant been asked by the Court to state precisely what his principle was. Actually, it amounts to this: That organised labour, and particularly that part of it which has been described as “predatory trade unionism,” wants to take all and give nothing. The “other fellow” must pay. The objector on. principle might profitably speculate upon the future wanderings of his £5. It will go into the coffers of the State. Perhaps it, or its equivalent, will emerge again as unemployment relief money. Thus will justice be served, and principle of an altogether worthier kind vindicated. * . * * *

Not much surprise will be occasioned by the Governments decision that nothing but full-cream cheese will be exported from the beginning of the new export season. Whatever might be said in favour of the standardised article, it was obvious that the buyer had the last word and his prejudice decided the matter. The abandonment of standardisation will not, however, solve all the industry s. problems. With that controversial subject out of the way, factories should concentrate on other means of improving their produce and its saleability. It is also noted with regret that while, standardised cheese is no longer to be exported, apparently it may still be sold on the local market. That is a mistake because, with so many ■ food alternatives, the New Zealander will not eat soapy cheese any more than his English cousins. The local market is a substantial one and should be cultivated as assiduously as the British market. z

It is a depressing commentary on human nature that Wellington relief organisations should have to devise a black-list against some who have been exploiting charity. The unfortunate part is the prejudicial effect these revelations will have on private generosity. People who are uneasy as to whether their benevolence may not be abused, and especially whether it will assist genuinely, deserving cases, are not likely to give so readily. Charitable organisations should realise the force of this argument, eliminate competition in well-doing, and direct all their efforts through a central organisation. A system of registration and identification would be the chief concern of the central bureau, which should be supported by official as well as unofficial channels of relief. With the present multiplicity of organisations, the unscrupulous and the cunning will generally succeed in “farming” more than one depot for it is admitted that even a method so alien to the spirit of charity as black-listing does not provide an efficient check.

While there will be concern for the citizens of New South Wales at the desperate straits into which their Labour Premier has brought them, no sympathy need be wasted on Mr. Lang. He has brought this upon himself; the pity is that so many other parties are involved in his financial sins—innocent parties except insofar as they listened and were deluded by Mr. Lang’s pleasant-seeming but dangerous doctrines. Now it is just a question whether the Labour Premier will be able to pay State salaries and wages next Thursday. It may have seemed to many an easy way to lighten the load to reduce interest compulsorily, or not to pay it at all, or even to repudiate the debts altogether—expedients which Mr. Lang has proposed and some of which he has tried—but the net result is that his State is now practically bankrupt with no one foolhardy enough to take the word or bond of a defaulter and come to his aid. The lesson should not be lost on New Zealanders when next they hear the Labour Party promising the millennium by tinkering with the credit mechanism. As Mr. Lang is discovering, it is no use trying to “mobilise credit” (a favourite phrase of New-Zealand Socialists) when that credit has been destroyed. It is impossible to mobiljse something that does not exist.