OUR SYDNEY LETTER.

Evening Star, Issue 12101, 6 November 1908, Page 3

OUR SYDNEY LETTER.

;• SPRING. With the spring have come flowers. We naye been favored with a somewhat more liberal rainfall on the coast, and the gardens look gay accordingly. And the ladies look gay, too, m their spring adornments. Spring meetings are in vogue in the world of sport, and the feminine as well as the masculine section of the community is taking' its measures accordingly. The Sydney Yacht Club had their opening race on Saturday. It was won by the colonially-built Thelma, with the help of a time allowance of 6min. She was sailed in a fairly fresh breeze by her designer, W. Reeks, and her victory was productive of great satisfaction among “the old brigade.” COMPANIONS IN DISTRESS. , Mr Deakin, at heart an anti-Socialist, accepts the support of the Labor party in order to remain in office. Mr Kidston, the Premier of Queensland, at heart a Labor man, now falls into the arans of Mr Philp, whom he had previously denounced as a hide-bound Conservative. History repeats itself. Poverty makes us acquainted with strange bedfellows. Alliances of this kind are opposed to the principles of party government. Yet in Australia they seem inevitable. BLIGHTED. % political circles there is a feeling of pronounced disappointment. Advocates of Federation, as distinguished from unification, have suffered a double rebuff; first, in the affirmation by the High Court of the constitutionality of the Surplus Revenue Bill, which deprives the States of a large slice of the revenue which they have been accustomed to receive from the Commonwealth, and secondly, in the cavalier treatment of the Reid censure motion. Taking the last first, few persons, probably not even the Treasurer himself, are thoroughly enamored of the policy set forth in his budget speech. But the practice of party government prohibit the free expression of opinion. In his slap at the States, the Treasurer goes too far for some members, not far enough for others. Tire Labor men are the “ hustlers ” of the House. They want But seeing that it is not obtainable any other way, they are V 5 >t by easy instalments. Mr Deakin doesn’t favor unification. But he does favor remaining in office, and is quite willing to make the required concession. To all parties, or, what is the *h' n ß’. a majority of the members _ parties, a change of Government would be supremely inconvenient. For it \‘Ould involve an appeal to the electors, a sudden cessation of the increased salary which they voted themselves, and considerable uncertainty whether they would return to the legislative halls. This consideration explains many things which would otherwise be inexplicable—the readiness, for instance, of the Labor men to make terms, and the perfunctorincss and half-heartedness of the Opposition. In the political, as well as in the industrial world, there is such a thing as looking for work, and praying that vou may not find it. Mr Deakin has to eat any quantity of dirt. But, after all, his powe'r of dissolution is the trump card which wins ail the tricks. THE HIGH COURT. The decision of the High Court to thg effect that projected and authorised expenditure is equivalent to actual expenditure is supremely unpalatable. Public criticism goes to any length, short of actual contempt of court, in endeavoring to show that the judgment is not in accord either with the letter of the Constitution or with the intentions of its framers. However, there is no appeal, except to the people themselves. If they desire the preservation of State rights they can say so by returning members who are pledged to that policy. But there will have to be a strenuous campaign of instruction first. If the opponents of unification remain as> spineless and apathetic as they are now, judgment will go by default at the next election as it did at the last. The “hustlers” will carry the day, and much the same old crowd will be returned. FREEHOLD. tlle - State Parliament Mr Moore’s Bill to give settles greater facilities for acquiring the freehold of their holdings has made some headway. It is opposed chiefly on account of a theoretical preference for a leasehold tenure. It IS well known that the leaseholder as a rule, does not take nearly so much interest in improving his holding as the freeholder does in improving his property. Thus under the former tenure the State and the neighborhood are r. u , t l V uffer ' On the other hand, the fieehold tenure, although it operates like a magic spell in promoting progress, mav he abused so as to produce stagnation. Hence the preference for the leasehold tenure which preference, by the way. is principally shown by those who, having no land ot their own, study the question mainly from its abstract, or theoretical side. The safeguard of the freehold system, however, resided in the power of taxation. A freehold subject to taxation is as much under the control of the community as a leasehold subject to periodical reapprahement. There can be no doubt, however os to which system will be productive of the more rapid progress. Tho Ministerial measure is complicated .with conditions. But it is well intended, and will probably pats in a form that will give much relief to many settlers who desire to establish themselves permanently on their holdings. HUMOR. Australian humor has not as yet become particularly prominent. Still, here and there arc gleams of the genuine article. In one of our morning metropolitan contemporaries, for instance, there were tho ether day two columns side by side, each aiming at the humorous, anil each “in spots ’ (like the curate’s egg) hitting the mark. That they neutralised each other was perhaps the most humorous feature about either. Mr W. 31. Hughes was responsible for one. In making out his ‘Case for Labor.’ he satirised the antiSocialist Woman's Conference. Here and there the cloven hoof peeps out under the assumed humor. But on the whole, it is not badly done. The writer gives away his case to some extent by admitting that the Conference was not so ferociously “anti” as its title might lead one to suppose. The writer of the other column has a keen eye for strong contrasts, and writes ' brightly and well. With the average man or woman humor is far more effective than argument. There is. of course, a kind of savage jeering ridicule which defeats its own object by arousing repulsion and indignation. But good humor—humor that remains good despite provocation—is almost omnipotent, and any efforts in this direction should be welcomed and encouraged. Tlie great difficulty is that if a speaker or writer has been sufficiently i n earnest to overcome the inertia which prevented him (or her) from speaking or' writing, they are usually too much in earnest to be humorous. What is wanted seems to be more earnestness, not less. The “deadly earnestness” must pass over into i “ lively ” earnestness. But the probability is that it will have first to be raised to a white heat. DEFENCE. There is not much of the saving grace of humor about the National Defence League. Even the proposals of the Go- I vernment are not drastic enough for them They want the words “ all male inhabitants fnall >je trained” to be substituted fori goal! b© liable to be trained/’ They want, moreover, to begin on January i : 1910, or sooner, instead of on a date to ' he fixed by proclamation, and they dcsiro ' many other amendments of a thoroughgoing character. The views and wwbcs°o{ the male inhabitants themselves, who are to bo thus dealt with, seem to have been left out of the account altogether. But doubtless, in due course, they will be heard from. I October 26.