NOTES AND COMMENTS

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXI, Issue 21844, 5 July 1934, Page 10

NOTES AND COMMENTS

BEST CUSTOMER Dr. E. L. Burgm, Parliamentary Secretary to tho Board of Trade, was tho principal guest at a luncheon of the American Chamber of Commerce in London. In America, he said, they had a rightful pride in size; many things thero were great. But thero was one very big thing they could not find in the United States, and that was their own best customer. The United Kingdom had that distinction and it was an order of merit that ought to appeal to American sentiment. He was glad to report that the commercial relations between the United States of America and the United Kingdom continued, in spite of all that was happening on the other side of the Atlantic and the depression that they had been through, to bq not only of tho friendliest character, but to he conducted on thoroughly normal lines. They in Britain rejoiced in America regaining her prosperity. Tho doctrine that one country could bo helped by the decline of another was a profound mistake. COMPULSORY CO-OPERATION A long chapter of the report of the commission appointed by tho Government of the Union of South Africa to report on agricultural co-operation is devoted to the discussion of compulsory co-operation, introduced in tho Co r operative Societies Amending Act, 1925. Tho commission's conclusions on this point are as follows:—" Compulsory cooperation or compulsory sale through one channel by means of a board of control, both of which have as object the fixation and control of prices, is economically unsound and socially unhealthy, and while it may temporarily benefit producers it will inevitably lead to over-production, maladjustment of supply and demand, and an ultimate collapse of prices. Price control schemes in other countries have proved that price levels cannot bo artifieally maintained since increased prices mean increased production and increased production means lower returns. The experience in the Union with price control measures in two of its, major agricultural products, tobacco and wine, substantiates tho view that this form of control is undesirable and not in the best interests of agriculture. Further, price control schemes have characteristics which are harmful to that independent spirit of self-help which is so essential in the building up of a virile and vigilant nation. Compulsory co-opera-tion and sales through ono channel with the object of fixing and controlling prices of agricultural products should not bo sanctioned by legislation and the existing provisions in the Cooperative Societies Act in this respect should bo repealed."

ARMS CONVENTION The archbishops and the representatives of tho various Christian Churches in Great Britain eloquently appeal to the Government and the country to do everything humanly possible to achieve an Arms Convention, says tho Times editorially. Their arguments are as convincing to common sense as they are true to morality. They name some of tho difficulties—the widespread fear, suspicion and mistrust, and tho absence of a sense of security. They recall the hopes held out to Germany in 1919; and they regard "narrow nationalism" as having been the chief obstacle to their fufilment. The price that must be paid to secure stability, they insist, is collective action; and a nation can

therefore no longer properly expect to be judge in its own cause. It must be ready to defer to an international judgment rendered by the League of Nations; and they imply that it must be ready, if necessary, to help in making that judgment effective. They consider that " the reason and conscience of mankind " are moving toward the acceptance of this principle; and, finally, as earnest Christians, they believe that their general acceptance would be in accordance with the will of God, and " what He wills is possible." No reasonable person can doubt that the world would be better off if it would accept the general principles so well stated in this letter, which are indeed already embodied in various State documents, including tho British Draft Disarmament Convention.

MORE PRACTICAL WAY It has become unmistakably apparent during the last two years, continues the Times article, that the nations of the world are not now ready to bind themselves uniformly to the provisions of one all-embracing Charter of reduced armaments. The world is not one political unit —nor even, as last year's Economic Conference showed, one economic unit. The post-war treaties that have in fact done something for peace and prosperity—tho Washington and London Naval Agreements, Locarno, Lausanne and Ottawa • —have been partial and regional. The League of Nations itself has never attained universality; and it is better to face the fact that there is no prospect now that sixty nations will accept the ninety-six detailed articles of tho British Draft Convention. Tho universal method has failed. The simpler, more practical and more British way has not really been tried. To tho proposal of tho International Labour Office that they should support a convention for a universal forty-hour week the British Government have very sensibly replied that limitation of hours can only bo dealt with industry by industry. Let them try the same method in disarmament. A beginning might be made in Europe by a treaty among the Continental nations and Great Britain that they would not bombard each other's territory from the air. The question of tho actual abolition of bombing aeroplanes could for tho moment be left in abeyance; but something at least would have been done to tranquilli.se the exaggerated fears of the present time and to check the actual increase of bombing machines which is everywhere threatened. And there arc other points about which there is fundamental agreement between all the leading countries. A short, simple convention might arrest competitive building in the large aggressive weapons of land warfare, just as twelve years ago it prevented tho futile spending of millions of pounds in 45,000-ton battleships. The establishment of an international supervisory commission to inspect national armaments would be an important step toward creating a common sense of responsibility. On these humble beginnings it should still most certainly be possible to build gradually a general system of regulated and reduced armaments.