ON THINGS IN GENERAL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 10428, 28 April 1897, Page 3

ON THINGS IN GENERAL.

THE POOR HUSBAND.

There should be nothing to wonder at in the application made by a man the other day to the magistrate for an order of maintenance against his wife. He may be a little in advance of the times, and like everyone that is gifted with the faculty of looking further than bis neighbours he is condemned by the slaves of convention. He lias caught the spirit of the times, which affirms the principle that the law should be equal as between the sexes, and if the man is answerable to the law for the mainten-

ance of bis wife, why should not the wife be liable for the support of her husband. This poor fellow has not been accustomed to hard work. In fact he does not seen to think he could do ib if he tried. But he

does not mean to try. Ib would give him wheals on his hands, and perhaps a pain in his back, and altogether it would make him uncomfortable, and why should he make himself uncomfortable, so long as he has a wife who might work for him. Ha is in the prime of his years and of his strength, but what of that! His wife is probably the same, and if she set herseli vigorously to the wash tub, she might mats a handsome living for both of them. Apparently she has the intention of leaving the country, and so evading her natural responsibilites, and why should she not bt brought back for desertion and compelled to give securities for the support of bei husband! It is true that there is a general sort of idea that ib is his part to work for her, and nob hers to work for him, but that is only a traditional sentiment) born of • time and circumstances that have passed away; and under a regime of equality between the sexes it is not to bt

tolerated for a moment by any intelligent person ; for all thab is wanted is a fair fieldand nofavour, and if through a mistaken and antiquated sentiment this woman is allowed to desert her husband there will be

nothing for him bub to come on to the charitable aid. This is the direction in which we are drifting, and there is nothing like recognising the principle at once and framing our procedure accordingly; and in the meantime, until public sentiment has comi abreast of the drift of the times ib isimpera tive that we form a Society for th» Proteo tion of Men. SYMPATHY FOR CRIMINALS. It would be curious to analyse the sentiment thab lies at the bottom of that interest which some people feel in notorioui criminals. That it is morbid there can be no doubt, bub like any other diseased condition, it seems to be just a disordered state of otherwise healthy dements. The dominant characteristic of it is no doubt

sensationalism. The mind seems to have a craving after the abnormal, something that does nob run along on the humdrum lines of ordinary life, and if it cannot have a big mountain or a big waterfall, it will do with a big calamity or a big murder. This craving for the strange and the start' ling is natural, and in itself is not reprehensible, but its morbidness appears when it is not corrected by consideration of the evil and repellent qualities of the object thai excites the sensation. Another characteristic of this interest in a notorious criminal is undoubtedly admiration. The mind is so constituted that it does homage to the doer of great deeds; and this is a quality implanted in human nature for the best and highest purposes; indeed it is one of the I most powerful agencies for elevating human I nature. But in a disordered, or in othet

words, an ill-regulated mind, the quality of the deeds themselves does not come forward in evidence, and there is a sort of blind admiration of the doer because of the mere

bigness of what he ha; done. There is no doubt also an element of pity or compassion for a great criminal as a human being held helplessly in the grip of fate, a . sentiment which in itself, as excited by a sight of helplessness, is amiable and far from reprehensible. But the disorder of it is in its not looking any further than the object immediately under its cognisance, and in taking ik knowledge of the sufferings and the fate ol the victim, which, if taken into the purview, should far more keenly move the feeling ol compassion. It would seem from this that only minds of the smallest calibre, and such as can only tako a narrow anil a partial view of things, can be moved to feel a deep interest in a notorious criminal. A mind that is large enough to grasp the whole case in a single view must be more impressed by the cruel and undeserved suffering of the victim, than by the griefs ol the man who inflicted it, and by the outrage and the menace to the whole community than by the penalty which justice demands in return ; and it is certain that no healthy and developed and properly regulated mind could feel otherwise than a chastened abhorrence at the' sight .of a notorious murderer.

CATHOLIC AND PROTESTANT. The question of the large preponderance of Roman Catholics in tho police force ol the colony has been raised in the correspondence columns of the Herald. It hat

been shown by one correspondent that while the proportion of Roman Catholics to Protestants in the population of the colony is as 1 to 7, the proportion of Roman Catholics to Protestants in the police farce in Auckland presumably throughout the colony— as 9to 1. In other words there are 63 times as many Roman

Catholics as there ought to be in the police force by a fair and equitable distribution of these offices between the two religious divisions of the community. In reply to this another writes that the correspondent "is suffering from the old Adam of religious bigotry," That is no answer, for the state of things revealed in these figures, i! correct, as it presumably is, is a disgrace to New Zealand, and calculated to produce a feeling of indignation and hatred in the community against the Roman Catholic

Church. I say this all the more frankly from the tact that in this column I have repeatedly denounced Protestant bigotry, as being much more pronounced and aggressive than that of Roman Catholics in this country. By that assertion I stand; bat no fair-minded citizen, whether Roman Catholic or Protestant, would defend such a gross abuse of administration as thii which gives these appointments in such a scandalous disproportion. The writer wh< undertakes to defend this state of thing; complains of the question being raised, anil says, "and yet we live in the nineteenth century "; and in very truth it is a wonder that we should find such an act ol

partiality and maladministration in thii age, and more particularly that we should find it in a country like this, the constitution and the policy of which are opposed to every kind of religious test or distinction. No one can say that this state of things is any stigma on tho Roman Catholic Church as such, for the authorities of that Church are in no way accountable for the wrong; but such an unfair state of things gives a handle to the enemies of that Church, and only too real a stimulus to that

odium theolog'cum which ehould never exist amone the citizens of a free country whew Protestants and Catholics stand on an equal platform. MORE INTERFERENCE.

The out-of-date prejudice against new things continues to show itself against the bicycle, and the cyclists are not worthy of the honourable position of leading in the new reform of locomotion, if they do nob present a firmer front. It appears that the police are now instructed to prevent a cyclist from leading his cycle along the footpath, and the police are likely to make themselves as obnoxious in this sphere ol operations as they used to do before thej were brought to order, in the officious application of the " move on " to unoffending citizens. It should be known that the cycle and the perambulator are on the same footing on the city footpaths—that is to say, that they are both forbidden, and if the cyclist is prevented from quietly leading his wheels on the footpath, ha ought to know the reason why in the case of the prams. Old residents will recollect the fierce conflict fought in behalf the babies' coaches many years ago, and how the City authorities were compelled by the force ol public opinion to hold their hands. A cycle quietly led by its owner is not such an obstruction as a pram, nor is there any' more danger of its running over anybody, nor is there any greater reason why the owner of it being on foot should be thrusb out into the perils of the roadway. ~.£ , : ; The General. '