NOTES AND COMMENTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 18020, 20 February 1922, Page 6

NOTES AND COMMENTS.

MODERN LAW-MAKERS. The methods and the results of the proceedings of the New Zealand Parliament have lately been criticised. The following extract from an article in the North American Review by Robert Withington, which refers particularly to tho United States Congress though it might be given a more general application, suggests that the fault docs not lie wholly with the legislature. He writes : " The profession of law-maker has attained a greater importance than it ever had before; and we look with profound respect upon those bodies of legislators who sit, like King Canute, upon the edge of the ocean, and decree that from this day on the tides shall rise no more, or who, like Joshua of old, command the sun to stand still in its courso, and vote millions to enforce this law. If we trained professional legislators—men who were to make a career for themselves as politicians (in the original and best sense of tho word) and serve the people, legislatively, with the same freedom and permanence as, judicially, the Supremo Court serves—it would be well to prepare them as we tram our law-mter-preters, so that thev would have a clear idea of what is within their province and what is not, But wo pull tho fanner from his field, the journalist from his pnntmgpiess the lecturer from bis Chautauqua circuit, tho manufacturer from his office, and set these humble neighbours in lofty placcs-and behold, they are become as the great ones of the earth, and their heavy words are weighted with meaning, because, forsooth, arc they no men and Senators, and do not the tides cease at their bidding, and does not the sun stand still at their words? And it has come to pass that our big guns are either men of large calibre, or else great bores. And the latter are in the majority But our voting machines continuo to turn out more big guns, without observing the difference." FIRES IN SHIPS' BUNKERS. Of the 242 cases of fires occurring on British ships during the year ended July M 1920 74 occurred in the bunkers. In' almost one-half of those bunker fires the cause has been conclusively shown to bo duo to tho so-called spontaneous combustion of the coal, and the circumstances,, attending practically all of the other cases leave little room for doubt that tho trouble was due to the same phenomenon. Recently a further investigation of the matter was made by Dr. J. T. Milton, formerly chief engineersurveyor to Lloyd's Register. After examining all available evidence, Dr. Milton reported to Lloyd's that he considers the conclusions given in a report to the Committeo of Lloyd's Register in 1912 do not require any modifications or additions. The main conclusions of tho 1912 report wore to the effect that the heating of coal, and the consequent risk of spontaneous combustion, is caused by the absorption of oxygen from the air and that this absorption is greater at high temperatures than at low. To minimise the absorption of oxygen by tho coal in reserve bunkers, or in any bunker in which men are not actually working, the lowor doors should bo kept tightly closed to prevent a current of air from passing through the bunker. Any parts of a bunker likely to be at a temperature higher than the normal, tho report continued, should bo stowed with large coal, which should be worked out as soon as possible, as also should the small coal which accumulates under shoots, etc. Another important point to which attention was called was that the danger of spontaneous combustion increases with the length of time the coal remains in the ship, so that, any coal left in a bunker when a fresh supply has to be taken in should be trimmed into such a position that it will be used on the next voyage. No risk, it va s declared, arose from coal being wet when taken on board, and small coal, when known to be of a fiery nature, might with advantage be damped when filling the bunkers-

LONDON'S HOUSE REFUSE. In view of the interest that has been aroused in such sanitary problems as the disposal of house refuse, it is interesting to learn that the great city of London still relic fl largely upon methods that have been condemned in Now Zealand as primitive and dangerous to public health. The Administrative County of London covers an area of 117 square miles and includes a population of 4.483,000 persons. It is divided into 28 metropolitan boroughs and the City of London, and the council of each oity and Borough is responsible for the collection and disposal of the refuse from its own territory. The annual amount of refuse is about 1,500.000 tons, or about 5000 tons for every working day throughout the year. Practically 80 per cent, of tins huge quantity of refuse is merely dumped in its crude form on low-lying land and in disused clay pits and quarries in the neighbourhood of London A total of only 280,000 tons is burnt in destructors, and the balance of 300,000 tons is disposed of at local shoots, or by sale, etc. Practically all the available dumping grounds are in the hands of a few contractors, and a proposal has been made that Parliamentary powers should be obtained for the compulsory acquisition of land for refuse disposal, so that municipalities could carry out their statutory ob igations independently of contractors. Even were such powers to be obtained, and presuming that they should result in a cheapening of the cost of disposal, the resolution' is only of a temporising nature and shows a lamentable want of vision, say s Engineering. At no far distant dato the dumping of crude refuse on unoccupied land must come to an end, either because there is no more land available, or more probably because these great dumps will be recognised as a nuisance and a menace to pub'ic health. They are essentially noxious in their nature and constitute breeding grounds for flies, rats and other vermin,

THE PERILS OF DIPLOMACY. A writer in the Figaro, M. Fernand do Fleury, recently revealed a diplomaticaffair, indeed " almost a complication," in the " lamentable and true adventure " of 3000 hares. " Hungarian by origin, French by adoption, who wished to como to their new country and could not." Ho says the Reparation Commission had " the beautiful dream " of making Germany restock with hares those regions of France where these animals had been almost exterminated by the war. Germanv however, blandly excused herself on the ground that the excesses of the Communists had so reduced her own stocks that she could not herself make up France's deficiency. Then, apparently France had to turn to Hungary, but Hungary also " under vain pretexts refused to contribute to our re-population." At last, however, 3000 Hungarian hares were bought through the intermediary of a Frankfort business man, and France was to have had " these amiable quadrupeds " at a cost of 70 francs for a male and 100 franca for a female. But "we had counted without Austria. Not only does Austria not adore us, but she hates Hungary even more. The occasion gave her an exquisite opportunity for doing two bad turns at once. She decreed that these hares were undesirables, and refused to permit their transit through her territory. The Ministries of Agriculture and of the Liberated Regions and the Quai d'Orsay intervened in vain. So the hares had to be left to shiver and decline in a concentration camp until Paris asked Prague to authorise their passage through Czechoslovakia. But " here again an obstacle arose. If the Czecho-Slovaks love us much, they hate their neighbours much more (it is curious how peace has been established in the East), and to annoy the Hungarians they raised all sorts of difficulties." The writer hints that the only way out will be to transport the tares to France by aeropluMi