TOPICS OF THE DAY

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 24, 29 January 1929, Page 10

TOPICS OF THE DAY

Heading tho evidence and the judgment of the Election Court in the Bay of Islands case, ono becomes vividly aware of the changes and chances of political life. Before the official declaration the result was a see-saw between Mr. Eushworth and Mr. Bell. The official declaration gavo the decision t. Mr. Bell on the returning officer's casting vote; but a Magisterial recount reversed this, and iMr. Eushworth was declared elected. Now the Election Court has. disallowed somo votes given to Mr. Rush-worth, and allowed some which wore withheld from Mr. Bell. The effect of the Court's decision is that Mr. Eushworth has not been duly returned, and a fresh election will therefore be necessary. This must be more satisfactory to the parties than a decision on odd votes. The judgment reveals, however, the weakness of our electoral system, and how unsubstantial the fabric of our boasted majority rule may be. If either Mr. Eushworth or Mr. Bell had definitely won the seat it would have been by tho votes of electors who showed themselves incapable of following the simple voting rules. It is amazing that there should be this difficulty in a country which boasts of its education. It gives rise to the question: Have we gono too far in granting tho franchise 1? An intelligence test that would satisfy all political parties would bo difficult to devise. Each party would claim, no doubt, that tho election itself was a sufficient test —all the intelligent being its own supporters, and the unintelligent voting with the other parties. But it may be quite seriously advanced that tho correct observance of voting rules should be required as a proof of capacity to vote. Where an elector carries out this simple task so faultily that a returning officer, a Magistrate, and two Supreme Court Judges cannot agree upon tho meaning of tho vote, there is surely sufficient ground for rejecting the voto altogether. This may be done not only because of the uncertainty, but becauso a voter so befogged by a simple process is not ono whose judgment on the merits of candidates or parties is worth the ballot paper he has spoilt.

The, Christchurch Tramway Board lias a strong claim for relief in respect of its road-maintenance charges. This was admitted by the chairman oil the Main Highways Board last year, and the Minister of Public Works also concedes the justice of the board's request. Wo trust, however, that an adjustment will be made "with due regard for the principles involved, otherwise a new anomaly may bo added to tho list awaiting the attention of the Ministry of Transport. Tho facts are briefly these: Tho tramway organisations, instead of paying in cash for. their right to lay tracks and use the roads, are called upon to maintain part of tho road. This part may be too much or too little. In the past no one bothered much about the fairness of the apportionment, as the division was between tram-users and ratepayers, who wero roughly identical. Now a third party—the motorist —is concerned, and the adjustment should be more exact, especially as that third party is a competitor of the tramways. Moreover, as the motorist pays his tax for the use of the full width of tho road, a proportion of his payments should go to the organisation which maintains part of that width. This is not a problem arising in Christchurch alone, though Christchureh has a greater complaint because of tho greater width of road maintained. It has its application even in towns wlicro the road-making authority also owns tho tramways, sineo that authority should allocate part of its petrol tax receipts to relief of the tramway roadmaintenance account. It is essential,

therefore, that the adjustment should be carefully made so that it may bo applied wherever the circumstances warrant.

"Wo Marxians understand the tempo of development of the British Labour movement and foresee its morrow much better than do the present theoreticians of the Labour Party." Thug wrote Trotsky in a book ("Whore Is Britain Going?") published in 1926. It is the same Trotsky as he who is now execrated, exiled, and otherwise persecuted by "wo Marxians" of Soviet Eussia. There seems to have been so deep a split in the "we" that it would be hardly safe at tho moment to try to define who tho Marxians of Eussia really are. Either the Trotskyist (excellent adjective) 'Group is not Marxian, or tho Stalinist Group is not Marxian, or else there are Marxians of widely differing hues whose business it is to prey on. one another and to make such arrests among the weaker faction (for tho timo being) as figure in Saturday's cablegrams. "We Marxians" aro confessed experts in foreseeing the morrow, ;it the same timo excellent judges of pace. That may be a racy way of translating Trotsky's "tempo of development," but. it seems to come to much the same thing. In the circumstances, if Trotsky would publish some anticipations in tho confident tone of 1926, but based on material nearer home and thereforo presumably more reliablo, ho would certainly find many readers among theso sociologists and stockholders who aro particularly/ keen to know "Where is Kussia Going?"

What is the Labour morrow that Trotsky sees in Britain, when he is not too busy in eluding his fellow Marxians in Russia'? This sentence tells enough: "A great deal less time will bo necessary to turn the Labour Party into a revolutionary party than was needed for its creation." In other words, though a. crowd of Labour hypocrites aro hanging on to the clock hands in Britain —including "this absolutely unprecedented lackey," J. H. Thomas, religion-ridden Wheatley, and other puppets of tho bourgeoisie—yet the great transformation scene will come, for in Britain '' the hive of revolution swarms too well this time." Yet the British transformation will not be just yet, for "in all probability the working class will have to renew their directive formation several times before they create . a party actually answering to the historical situation and tasks of the British proletariat." Now, according to the published views, the process of renewing the directive formation is still going on in Eussia, with Trotsky on tho wrong side of the fence.. The p.arty "actually answering to the historical situation" has not yet had tim« to lodgo its final answer. Meantime history marches on, and neither the objective nor the tempo has yet yielded its secret even ■ under tho pressure of tho exact political science expounded by wo Marxians.