TOPICS OF THE DAY.

Evening Post, Volume LXXIX, Issue 77, 2 April 1910, Page 4

TOPICS OF THE DAY.

Britons will read the story of the wreck of the Pericles, off '" Worthy of Leeuwin, as narrated The Race. 1 ' by a passenger, in to- , day's cable news, with, quickened pulses. As the story of the Biikenhead was read by lioyal command with regimental orders to every Prussian regiment, so might this incident make a profitable reading in all our public schools. Free from llorid rhetoric or needless elaboration, the story in its simple directness is the more effective in arousing the deeper emotions. We have the picture of the sudden check in the great liner's progress, tho roar of escaping steam below the walerhno, the rapidly-progressing leak, and the settling down of the bow till the propeller rose in air and the ship, six miles from land, drifted towards Use rocks. Yet there was "no panic or foolish terror," and the secret of it all S c?Z ms to have Leen setf-forgetfuhiess. Every one appeared anxious to help evory one else." And one vignette follows another, sharp and clear— "every hand stretched to help" the bHnd doctor as Iris valet led him to the deck— the wife who stayed for boat No. 2 that she might accompany her husband — the efficient crew, who had all the five hundred souls safely transferred to the boats in less than half an hour— the brave woman who in the rough sea started the chorus of "Pull for the Shore"— and tho jovial midshipmen who took up the strain "as if at a picnic." Already we havo read of the hospitality shown to crew and passengers by the dwellers at this remote outpost of the West Australian coast. Sudden danger is a crucial test. It sometimes brings to light the worst qualities of men and women ; more often, we think, it shows them, as in this instance, at their best. The solo comment of the narrator seems fully justified : " The way every one behaved was a credit to the race." "A lot of nonsense and flap-doodle has been talked, and that A Cabinet is about the full sum Chesterfield. and substance of the agitation raised," says gentle he of Motueka, the Ministry's arch-courtier, the Hon. B. M'Kenzie, referring in his inimitable way to the North Auckland railway. Tho Ministerial Captain Kettle dismisses editors with a shrug. "I feel I know more about the details of the case than the editors of the Auckland papers," said Mr. M'Kenzie, according to a Northern paper, and he "likewise could follow the agitation right through the South Ibland, and could, if he chose, tell them tho gentlemen responsible." Merciful Motueka for withholding the names! Do those gentlemen not tremble? Yet the editors of the North may know more than Mr. M'Kenzie even dreams that they know. The "practical man," who declared down the West Coast that he did not know what good Dr. Bell (Director of the Geological Survey) could hope to do by peering a thousand feet down into the earth's crust, has no monopoly of wisdom, or knowledge. Mr. M'Kenzie has been rightly commended at times for showing firmness in situations in which Ministers generally exhibit flaccidity and vacillation, but his firmness is occasionally apt to degenerate into sheer obstinacy and unintelligent egotism — a "practical man" versus the wide world, with all its experts — a bush Ajax defying enlightenment. Mr. M'Kenzie lifts not yet satisfactorily explained how he came to put his own notions above the opinions of engineering experts in this Northern railway matter, and no amount of bluster will make good the omission of convincing argument. His purpose will not be accomplished by charging "flapdoodle" against his critics, andjh© will not succeed even if he ascends to "bunkum," "blanky rot," or "piffle." I | The Bylaws Sub-committee entrusted with renaming come of Naming the city streets, and the Streets, suggesting new names in order to avoid duplication, has made its repoit. It is remark able among other things for its absence of the _ tense of humour, and for the infertility of imagination of thoso who compiled it. Anything that will obviate duplication of names of itreets will be welcomed, no doubt, especially by the hapless stranger whose voice cannot be heard in the councils of the city; anything that will render it practically impossible for a Bishop to wander befogged in Kilbirnie in tho belief that he is in Kelburne, -where he i& to dine with his brother diocesan— and this did happen — would be desirable. But what has the sub-committee done in the way of substituting euphonious names for those which are not, or are at most memorials of persons with no greater claim to such honour than financial interest in an estate in which such streets lie? Littlo or nothing. A slight has been placed upon the reveled John Wesley, whose name has been supplanted by that of Rcwsmoor. WMio or where is Kossmoor? Is there bigotry here again? What was wrong with College-terrace, that it should bo changed to Girton-terrace? Is there petticoat influence at work here? Or with North-avenue, that it should ■be renamed Kilmore-avenue? Is it likely to become o>riv<il of Willis-street for the quarter of the medical profession? Beau-mont-grove may be sententious, but is it a descriptive title to apply to what is known as Poplar-grove? Stout-terrace, althougn in some hort honouring the Chief Juutice, may be offensive to pi-o-hibitionistb; but then is its proposed new designation, Irvine-afreet, an improvement? Who was Irvine? Edward Gibbon Wakefield, it is good to see, is to be remembered in a part of Victoriastreet. This is pood, because when thoenquiring littlo Wellington boys to come ask After whom .thu strce& wgi named,

there should be forthcoming an instructive biographical epitome of one who has done much for the land in which we live. Baden Rhode, Kilbirnie, it is suggested ■to alter to Baden-road, which is certain,Jy clearer, and the Spanish Aimadamay be recalled in James-street, Hataitaa, which it is proposed to call Drake-street. But the repoit will no doubt receive much editing on the part of the council *3 a whole before acceptance, and if it prevents duplication only it will work a welcome change. At one time during the Hibernian Conference that old bogey, A Happy Auckland versus WelllngSolution. ton, Tes>red its distressful head, but peace came admirably before the delegates had discharged the order paper. A low-pressure movement from the South raised a tempeet, which cleared the air, aad. revealed the sun of unity in an azure sky. Here is the sentiment which found favour: "The delegates affirm the principle of unity, and pledge themselves and their respective bodies in the cause of unity." One party desired to have another grand district, separately from Auckland, where the headquarters have been for many years, but there was nobitterness, and harmony soon prevailed. A pleasing sign that Wellington had only the best of brotherly feeling for Auckland occurred towards the close of the conference last night. A Wellington delegate proposed a vote of congratulation to Mr. P. J. Nerheny, who topped the poll in the recent Hospital and Charitable Aid Board election in Auckland. Another suggested that the name of a Wellington delegate, who had been successful here, should be coupled with Mr. Nerheny, but the Wellington mover gently waved the proposal asido, and all Wellington opinion was heartily in accord with the recommendation that the energetic Northerner should have the vote all to himself. This incident is only one of a number that could be quoted to show that Wellington people have no hostility to their follow New Zealanders of Auckland — no jealousy, no envy. There has been a deep-rooted belief in Auckland for five or six decades that Wellington has ever been eager to get some profit at Auckland's expense, but the belief is erroneous and very unfortunate. The people of the South have no fever to take advantage of their brethren in the North. By devious shifts and by irrelevant ravilings, Messrs The Painters' Alfred D. Hart Fifteen Shillings, (president) and James Buchanan, (secretary) of the New Zealand Painters and Decorators' Federation, have endeavoured to explain away the fifteen shillings incident which was fully reported in yesterday's Post. These two gentlemen have made a weak case weaker by their bluster and peculiar disregard of facts, which can be proved by at least two witnesses. With remarkable shortsightedness Messrs. Hart and Buchanan have thought to put themselves right with the public by a species of specious quibble. "The interview therein reported with the secretary did not take place, as no communication whatever between reporter and secretary took place," they wrote. It is true that the reporter had no interview with the Federation's secretary (Mr. Buchanan), but, with a Post representative ppssent, he had an interview with Mr. Reyling, who was understood to be acting as secretary for the conference. Certainly, whatever Mr. Reyling's status was at the conference, he was acting for the delegates in conducting the negotiations about the fifteen shillings for a day's attendance at the meetingand twelve type-written copies of the report. The delegates of the Federation sought refuge in "indignation." They accused The Poet of publishing "absolutely false" information, and making a "scurrilous attack on labour," and publishing matter "purely for the purpose of discrediting labour generally." On the statements given in The Poet /esterday the public can easily gauge the worth of n protest made by men who have been at pitiable shifts in putting up a defence for an offer which can be defended only on the ground of astonishing ignorance. But they^ have not pleaded ignorance ; they have preferred to try to bTazen it out. The Post has not attacked labour in this matter, scurrilously or otherwise, but has given tho . facts concerning the Painters' Conference and the fifteen shillings. Probably Messrs. Hart, Buchanan, and the others, have given more pain to the more reasonable members of the Labour Party than to anybody else. The painters, in their attempt to whitewash themselves, have made a lamentable spectacle of themselves.