NOTES OF THE DAY

Dominion, Volume 25, Issue 167, 11 April 1932, Page 8

NOTES OF THE DAY

In connection with the public discussions and Parliamental y debates on the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act Amendment Bill it is interesting to peruse the speeches that were delivered in the House of Representatives in 1893-94 when the original Act Was being forced through in the face of strong opposition. Subsequent experience has justified much of the criticism then expressed, especially as regards the doubts raised as to the unwisdom of making industrial conditions subject to artificial restrictions. The late Hon. John Duthic, M.L.C., then a member of the Lower House, was particularly emphatic in his condemnation of the Bill and, when it was finally passed, predicted that however successfully it might work in prosperous times —he conceded nothing in that respect, however—it would not survive a serious economic crisis. That was a true prophecy, although neither the late Mr. Duthie nor anyone else in those days could have had the remotest conception of♦ the magnitude of the crisis which civilisation has been called upon to face nearly forty years later. * * ¥ *

Optimistic anticipations concerning the prospect of the foui principal European Powers arriving at a working agreement for the economic reconstruction of the Danubian States have not been realised. The Conference has been a failure, and a failure in a wider sense than in the particular objective sought to be achieved. ‘ It is plain from the report published to-day that political mistrust between France. Germany and Italy still vitiates the atmosphere of European relationships. The Danubian Conference was a test of their ability to rise above purely commercial and political considerations in a common effort to assist the hard-pressed smaller States, and the three European Powers failed to survive it. Germany appears to be still smarting from the action of France in putting a spoke in her wheel in connection with the proposal for an Austro-German Customs Union, while France is too suspicious to regard any proposal submitted by Germany fo r the settlement of the Danubian problem as being purely disinterested. The collapse of this particular attempt to act in concert on a matter concerning the well-being of a part of Europe is not an encouraging augury for the larger questions of international debt settlements and disarmament.

However much the sensibilities of decent-minded people may be shocked by the report of the outrageous case heard in the Children’s Court on Saturday morning, citizens will probably reluctantly agree with the Magistrate, Mr. McNeil,, that in the public interest such a scandal should not be hid. While it would be a mistake to generalise too much on a single instance, many may also reflect they had almost forgotten that the Court had been functioning for years, veiled from the public eye, and may ask themselves sharply whether the ban on publicity has been a good thing. More than likely it is better that ordinary cases of youthful delinquency and faults due to the irrepressible spirits or vagaries of adolescents should not be recorded in the Press and so magnified, but the public should not go on iti ignorance of more serious offences involving vicious tendencies. Disease germs flourish in darkness; they languish in air and light. As it is, there is no healthy public opinion to watch the functioning of what should be an excellent institution, although constant effort is no doubt being put forth by social workers in helping to straighten out the unsocial kinks of those who come before the Children’s Court. Part of the remedy may lie in allowing the Press, as the informer and maker of public opinion, regular access to the Court, a privilege that could be carefully guarded at the discretion of the presiding Magistrate. At any rate the present case should jolt the conscience or all parents and remind them of the duty to guide and control their children.