TOPICS OF THE DAY

Evening Post, Volume LXXXIII, Issue 152, 27 June 1912, Page 6

TOPICS OF THE DAY

Once more the people of New Zealand are busily speculating Excitement about the daily moods in Politics, of certain politician*. In February the men whose minda much agitated the public were "the Labour Four (Messi'S. Veitch, Robertson, Payne, and Hindmarsh) and Nelson's 'lndependent, Mr. Atmore. Today the "doubtfuls," as recorded in one estimate by a student of politics in The Post yesterday, ate Messrs. Millar, M'Kenzie, Clark, Coates, and Veitch. Mr. Coates, an Independent, was given a "free hand" the other day by a number of his electors, and was urged to support Mr. Massey. Nobody except Mr. Coatee, who voted for Sir Joseph Ward in February, knows how he will turn next month, and perhaps Mr. Coates himself does not yet' know which lobby he will ©elect. Mr. Veitrh is priictieally committed to act with Ihe other Labour men, and therefore he will not surprise the country by voting against Mr. Massey, as the little Parliamentary Labour Party, as a wholo. will be on the side of the Hon. T. Mackenzie, if the statements of the past few months are any criterion. Messrs. Millatand M'Kenzie have declared publicly and plainly that if some kind of coalition of moderate Liberals is not possible in the present House of Representatives they will try to force a dissolution, and it is understood that Messrs. Sidey and Clark may be amenable to the influence of Mr. Millar. However, the intention* of Messrs. Sidey and Clark may yet be modified. On present evidence, the situation aeems to turn on Me&srs. M'Kenzie and Millar. Then- votes alone will be sufficient to put the Government out by 40 to 39, assuming that the other "doubtfula" are held by the Ministry. The Government etill seems to be confidant of winning somehow, but victory can come only by the 'favour of at least one of two men who havo said "coalition or dissolution." Several members of the Ministry have been just as emphatic as come members o£ the Oppositi'.n (notably the Lender) iji poohpoohing Iho suagesticuH about coalition,

Government and excitement for the public are in store. Mind;reading is one of the politicians' principal occupations just now, An amazing legal muddle is revealed by the judgment of An _ the Arbitration Court Arbitration which was filed and Muddle. published yesterday. An amendment of the Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration Act, passed last year, purported to provide tor the making of an award which should apply, iv the first instance, to more than one industrial district. The amending Act came into force on the let March, but it was not till the 13th Juno that the regulations under it were gazetted by the Labour Department. Naturally impatient at this long delay, which covered more than seven mouths from the passing of the Act, the New Zealand Federated Bakers and Pastrycooks' Association of Workers made application for «a Dominion award relating to their industry, without waiting for the regulations. Ou account of defects, which the judgment docs not specify, this application had to bu abandoned. But it now appears that neither the regulations nor any amendment of the claim will help the association. Tho amending Act under which the proceedings were taken st>mns to be just as defective as tho proceedings themselves. "Having carefully considered the provisions of section 4 of the Act of 1911. and of the regulations made thereunder," says the Court, "wo have no hesitation in 'advising the association to abandon the attempt to ob^ tain an award under the Act in it* present shape." So complicated and conI fused are the provisions for the fixing of the place of hearing— which is left in the first instance, to agreement beI tween the parties, and, failing that, to the Court— that it would probably take months to settle this single preliminary point. Agreement between the parties is clearly a ridiculous way of attempting to determine such a matter, especially as there may be hundreds of them. Nor is any provision made as to when the Court i» to fix the date of hearing. "Could anything," asks the Court, "be more absurd?" It is clear that somej body has blundered egregiously, and that the Act must remain a dead-letter ! until Parliament finds time to set him right. A cable message from London to-day attributes to Mr. DonImperial aid Campbell, Aus- 1 Stocktaking, tralia's representative on I the Imperial Trade Commission, an expression of doubt a» to whether the expenditure on this projected world-wide enquiry will be justified. The reason given for Mr. Campbell's pessimism is tho chairman's ruling that it will not be tho fnnction of the Commission "to take evidence and make recommendations concerning inter-Do-minion reciprocal Customs treaties." Mr. Campbell contends that this decision will exclude enquiry into all forms of preference, including tariffs and subsidies to shipping, and will, therefore,, re duce the scope of the Commission's usefulness. On the brief statement reported to-day, it appears possible that Mr. Campbell has read more into the chairman s ruling than the chairman meant. This delicate, question of preference was discussed at the last Imperial Conference, which adopted Sir Wilfrid Laurie'r's proposal for a Royal Commission on Imperial Trade. The Canadian Premier recommended that one function of the Commission (which was primarily to take stock of the resources of the Empire) should be to determine: "To what extent, if any, the trade between each of the different parts has been affected by existing legislation in each, either beneficially or otherwise," with the object of advising amendments. The British authorities had cause to fear an eternity of controversy from such a, course, and, therefore, Mr. Harcourt persuaded the conference to accept an amendment, limiting the Commission's suggestions for improvement to methods "coneieteal with the existing fiscal policy of «ach part." This was a safe proviso, as an insurance against the resentment of any member of the Imperial family. \ Apparently Mr. Campbell now wishes the Commission to have such a scope as Sir Wilfrid Laurier first advised, and the chairman, has rightly ruled against him. We are assuming, of course, that the Commiauipn will go as far as the text of Mr. Harcourt' s words permits, and such action, in conjunction with the general stocktaking, must surely be sufficient warrant for the expenditure on the projected tow of the world. Whatever limitations the Commission may have in the fiscal sphere, its work must havo a very great educative value.