"CHERISHED VIEWS." NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA

Evening Post, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 10, 12 July 1909, Page 2

"CHERISHED VIEWS." NEW ZEALAND AND AUSTRALIA

A STICK TO BEAT THE PARTY DOG WITH. (From Our Australian Couespondent.) SYDNEY, 3rd July. The altitude of most people in Australia towards New Zealand is very like the attitude of most people in New Zealand towards Australia — an attitude of indifference. Each country suffices for itself. Thr> people in each couutry are busy with "local affairs, their own affairs, and do not think vividly or particularly about the other country. It is possible to live for months in Australia and never hear New Zealand mentioned, just as it is possible to live for months m New Zealand and never hear Australia mentioned. The average New Zealnnder's stock of knowledge about Austiaha, in my opinion, is larger than the average AnstraHan's stock of knowledge about New Zealand. Nine New Zen-landers in ton know that the Prime Minister of Australia is Alfred Deakin. 1 doubt if one Australian in ten could tell me the name of the Prime Minister of New Zealand. And this is a faiv comparison, though not one New Zealander in ten could tell me the name of the Premier of Western Australia. As regards that personage, the New South Welshman and the Victorian are scarcely better informed. We all grip most tightly the little bit of knowledge that lies nearest to us. And then most figures on the Australian political stafee come and go so quickly. Mr. Asquith or Mr. Balfour makes politics the earner of a lifetime ; he represents a solid party ; he grows up and matures with us, and our knowledge of him has time to become definite. But with Mr. ,T. C. Watson, a New Zealander is just beginning to gel t acquainted when Mr. Watson drops out of notice. Sir Joseph Carruthers appears for an instant and vanishes. Mr. Peakeand Mr. Moore may be only the creatures of a political day. There is not m Australia the stability of English public lite, and if New Zealand really cared about the small personalities that for a moment are all-important to some Australian State, there would still be a difficulty in comprehending their scope and merit. Australia lives in a similar cloud of ignorance concerning New Zealand. But tli-eie are some ideas that lighten the popular mind, having beey acqXihed slowly in the last fifteen years. One is that New Zealand is commercially prosperous ; another that New Zeafand is legislatively progressive. They are corlect Idea*., as you see. And the popular mind links them together: it attributes the commercial prosperity to the legislative pi ogress — just as any Treasurer attributes a good season's surplus to the administration o£ his government. This being the case, that paine prosperity, for a dozen years past, has been worn as a feather in the cap of Australian Liberate, and has been plucked as a thorn from the side of Australian Conservatives. Even, and rather comically. Si i Joseph Ward's surpluses have been transferred to the credit of Australian Labour Socialists. New Zealand legislation has "advanced" so far that, until quite recently, almost the only advocate* of similar measures* in Australia '♦have been found oil Labour platforms. Hence New Zealand, to some extent, has appeared in Australian eyes as a State un der Labour control ; and for years has been used as a stick to beat the Contervative dog with. How far from Labour control New Zealand is, New Zealanders know, but Australians do not ; arid the last yearV> strikes (against a progressive Government which practises things that in Aitstralia are only Labour precepts) pee m eel ur-intelligible to Australian Labour newspapers. Their editors, cannot comprehend how it is that the Ward Ministry should be denounced as an enemy of the workers by New Zealand Trades and Labour Councils ; and the awkward fact its still unassimilatcd. In Auetialiyn ejes, Now Zealand ptill wears the Labour-Socialist garment ; ami all her ptosperity and progress ha.ye been eagerly turned to Australian Labour-Socialist profit. Quarter of a million surplus ' And this is the country with an Arbitration Act and a Workers' Compensation Act. Half a million surplus ! And this is the countiy with .1 Public Trustee and a Minister for Labour. Three-quarters of a million surplus ! And this is the country with a. State Insurance Department and State CoaL Mines. The connection was obvious to the public mind, and the Conservatives writhed: Here were these dangerous, things proven, by an argument quite good enough foi the multitude, to be the corner-stone of a natiou's prospei'ity. There was no doubt about the State Insurance and the Stale Mines, and Hie Conservatives did not know enough to make 'nasty Opposition remarks about the quality of the Treasurer's surplus. So the dog was duly beaten. Now it is the Conservative uirii. This year's depression in New Zealand's trade, this year's tale ol unemployment, this year's emigration from New Zealand to Australia, have been "nuts" to Aus trnlian Conservatives. "I see things are very bad in New Zealand." "Yes; what could you expect ? I hear they've actually not the oysters under their Socialistic government now. State oysters ! Think of it, hey? " "Well, I know the thing couldn't Iml# It only .shows wha.t the Socialists hiing the country to in tho en<l." I positively affirm that this t-ketch of a conversation accurately represents the knowledge, the opinions, and the sentiments held regarding New Eeulancl by two worthy gentlemen in ati Australian Conservative Club. Animosity? Bless you, no! But, as tho French wit says, there is something in the misfortuneh of our best friends that is not wholly displeasing to us; and, besides, it is a great comfort to find facts apparently justifying the cherished convictions of a lifetime. Australian Conservative opinion is not hostile lo New Zea-lnnders: but to New Zealand, as a Socialist State — well, we told you how it> would be, and there you see it ! Country gone io the dogs ! Yes ; N<w Zealand undoubtedly appears in the minds of most Australians aa a State very Jar advanced in Hie direction of Socialism. (Think of it, Mr. Hogg!) So, for' the present, encouraging allusions to New Zealand are not made on the Labour platform or by the Labour press ; and the more or less, Conservative pre/w, aft an indignant New Zealand journalist lias noted, prints leadiiig articles—- only btie for each paper — in which the subject of lessened trade is dealt with. The moral i» not preyed home ; but it is implicit for every reader tv draw according to his political opinions, since New Zealand's "advanced" lepulntion is firmly established. And in the Commonwealth Parliament a sly Senator will interrupt a Labour speech with the remark, that '"1 see the last New Zealand boat brought another two hundred men away from the country" — mid Labour has no retovl, for the* Labour knowledge of New Zealand is as scanty as the Conservative. New Zealand is always the stifle, • but juet now it is the Labour clog that get*, beaten. Thorp ts< r&dU;v no way in which New i»cXfAiA iwn *vni/).. beini\ ueed as a handy

political argument by* one Australian party or the other, according to chcumstanceß. Nor is it pow-ible to convince Australians that New Zealanders are essentially more Conservative than Australians are. "Advanced legislation" liaf, niadna deep impression on the Aunti.iliau mind, and the average Australian cannot be shaken in his belief that New Zealand is something very like a Soualisl State, where the Labour paitv is dominant. The only thing te do is lo keep the argument on the profitable side, and to renew the "prosperity" wbuh justifies the "progress"— even though Australian Conservative beliefs have to look elsewhere for support.