ACROSS THE STRAIT.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLIII, Issue 174, 21 July 1909, Page 8

ACROSS THE STRAIT.

GOSSIP FROM THE EMPIRE CITY

[FROM OUR CORRESPONDENT.]

WELLINGTON, Tuesday. Mr Krishnavarina, the editor of The Indian Sociologist and the promotor of the India House "settlement," which seems to have been a centre of Indian sedition in London, has acknowledged in The Times that he "approves" the foitl murder of Sir William Wyllie, and ''considers ks author," the student Dlnnagn, "a martyr in the cause of Indian independence." I shall be curious to see what action the British Government takes after this. Mr Krishnavarma has, I believe, shifted his residence to Paris, but he has no doubt left behind 'him'in London a host of sympathisers and fellow conspirators. Were these persons in India they could be dealt with promptly and effectually by the Calcutta Government, and they should be expelled from Great Britain forthwith. It would be no great loss to England were a lot of the pestilent mischiefmakers of the Keir Hardie type shipped out of the country at the same time, for upon their heads lies, morally, no small portion of responsibility for the foul deed which was recently done at the Imperial Institute. Certain New Zealanders who gushed over Keir Hardie when he was out here must be feeling rather uncomfortable just now. Lord Lansdowne appears to threaten a blocking or rejection of the Lloyd-George Budget Bill by the Lords. It is difficult to see exactly how they can either mangle or reject a Finance Bill by the elected branch of the Legislature, but apparently this is what Lord Lansdowne infers is to be the case. It would, however, be premature and foolish to assume that the rejection of the Bill if it be constitutionally possiblewould meet with such universal disapproval as the Liberals may imagine. The new Budget hits the wealthy —and not only the very rich but the moderately wealthy—classes so 1 hard that there would be a tremendous power at the back of the Conservatives should a dissolution take place as a consequence of any such action on the part of the Lords as that insinuated by Lord Lansdowne. The liquor trade is against the Government—it always has been—the Anglican Church (the majority at least) is ditto. These forces have .always been in opposition to the Asquith Ministry, but to them have I now been added a vast army of people who belong to the wealthier ! middle class. If once this section gets it into its, head that the Budget proposals are too drastic. and that the '<Ha.ye Nots" are to be benefited at the expense of the "Haves," the Government would, I think, most certainly go down at a general election. : •* . . * As against these factors" there is always the old distrust and dislike of the hereditary, chamber "bossing" the Lower House, which is innate in the majority of Englishmen of the I middle classes. The rejection of ! Gladstone's Home Ruie Bill by the Lords was, it. is true, popular, but that was not a money measure pure and simple, as is the Budget Bill; and a host of prejudices, racial, sectarian and otherwise, were then to the front. Sooner or later wealth must pay a much heavier contribution to the Exchequer than it has done, and even should the Asquith Ministry fall, the Conservative innings would not be long, and in the long run the great landed magnates and possessors of huge wealth generally will be made to disgorge. A variety of circumstances are tending just now to make the Government unpopular, but within ten years from .now.'the graduated taxation on land, and incomes will, I venture to predict, be even higher than what Mr< Lloyd-George now proposes. The evil day for wealth may be postponed, but come it must. ' • •

Lucky indeed is a lady passenger by ,the Athenic who dropped her handbag (containing £40 and some valuable papers) into the water at the Queen's Wharf last Tuesday. The Harbour Board's diver went down, but could not locate the bag, but yesterday another diver, assisted by Mr Gow, a well-known local publican who has been engaged in several much more important "treasure-seeking" undertakings (the Elingamite wreck, for instance), made another attempt, with the result that the bag was secured. The cause of the mishap was made apparent when the bag was brought to the surface, one side of the handle having become loose and detached from the bag. That is always a danger with ladies' handbags, the handle being attached—as I have often noticed—to a little metal slot. This , works loose from the leather, and accident is then easy enough. The incident is but one more proof of the singular carelessness displayed by passengers on steamers with regard to money. Crossing from Holyhead to Dublin some four years ago I witnessed a curious scene. A lady passenger just before the boat reached Kingston suddenly discovered she had lost a small leather jewel case. She was greatly excited, and after going into hysterics and otherwise "performing," she swore positively that she had left the case under her berth. The steamer was stopped as we were approaching the wharf, and search made everywhere. The result —after a delay of nearly an hour —! was that the missing case was found on deck under a lounge chair in which the excited dame had been reclining. The case, I may say, contained jewellery of the value of over £300 and £60 odd in notes and gold. If the lady had only handed—as is the usual rule—the case to the purser to be {)laced in his safe, all the fuss would mve been saved. The same sort of carelessness is common enough on railway trains, as most old travellers know full well.

An Auckland schoolmaster has, I see, been drawing attention to the lack of manners in our school children. He is right, I am only too much afraid, in stating that the words "sir" and "thank you" might be more frequently used by our New Zealand girls and boys. But he goes on to complain that when, the other day, the Governor, accompanied by his wife, addressed a class of pupil teachers, and smilingly said "good morning" when he left the room, the unanimous . reply was a curt "good morning," and not in one single instance was the expression "good morning your Excellencies" heard. But as a matter of fact, the offending pupil teachers would have been quite wrong had they said "your Excellencies." Lady Plunket, albeit a most gracious and estimable lady, has no more right to the title ot' "your Excellency" than your humble servant. Before the Phmkets came upon the scene this absurd and quite inaccurate expression, was never heard. "Your Excellency" is quite right when Lord Plunket is in ques-

tion, Jbut quite wrong when his good lady is concerned. Lord Plunket is the Governor of New Zealand, but his wife is not "Lady Governor," if I may be permitted to coin the expression. The correct way to address Lady Plunket when either she accompanies her husband or is alone is "your ladyship." Before Mr Tibbs, who is headmaster of the Auckland Grammar School, lectures the primary school pupils and teachers on manners and etiquette, he should make sure of his facts.