PASSING EVENTS.

New Zealand Mail, 21 February 1901, Page 34

PASSING EVENTS.

History is philosophy teaching by examples. —Thucydides. • Lord Kitchener has evidently been left with a greater undertaking than was estimated by either General Buller or Lord Roberts three months ago. The ta.sk that has been .set has proved so far to be much like thd"' chase of the-wisp. The phantom De Wet and his commando are reported one day to be flying to the north-east hard pressed by the British to the borders of Swaziland; next we hear of his Having crossed the Orange River, where in northern Caps Colony the vindictive exactions, destruction of property, and wanton cruelty of his followers is recalling some of the worst scenes of 'the early campaign in Natal. This may nave the effect of alienating the sympathy of the Cape Dutch from the Boer cause, but that evidently does not disturb De Wet, who carries on his devastating work and guerilla warfare with unabated zeal. All the while there is a good deal of bartering going on in munitions of war. Colonel Plumer captures a Maxim gun and a quantity of ammunition from De Wet, but it turns out that the Maxim gun and the ammunition had been taken from the British some time before; and in the brisk fighting at Philipstown we read “the enemy used a fifteen-pounder captured from the British, the shrapnel bursting splendidly.” De Wet ancl liis commandants, whose followers are again reported to be shattered and broken, are rendering the situation extremely difficult for Lord Kitchener, who is meanwhile organising and replenishing his forces. The war is not over, and it will require a force as lightly mounted and as mobile as the marauding commandoes to put an end to the guerilla warfare. While the British general is recruiting his ranks with adequate and suitable forces, the Boer commandoes are gathering together their scattered remnants, securing better mounts, laying up stores of food and ammunition and acquiring heart and confidence by successful depredations. All this is, however, but a flash in the pan—a prolongation of that- agony which in the end will be all the more bitter because of its present fitfulness.

The Anglican General Synod lias somewhat modified the opinion of the Diocesan Synod of Waiaput respecting the question of legalising the sale of liquor in the King Country. The care of the Government for the Maori and the determination of the people not to -put temptation in liis way, has been the reason why licenses have been withheld from the King Country. But from reports furnished by those opposed to the illicit traffic it appears that the Maori is himself the chief transgressor. “The slv-grog shops in the King Country are not kept by Europeans, but by Maoris and half-castor ” Mr Kensington, who made this statement at the Synod, had exceptionad opportunities of studying the question last year. He had visited the sly-grog shops; and leading Maoris, doubtless concerned for their people’s welfare, now consider that the only hope of stopping the illicit traffic is by having, licensed houses. It is notorious that those opposed to the granting of licenses are agreed that the statements of men like Mr Kensington are not exaggerated. They hold, however, that “license” is riot the cure; so the Rev. T. H. Sprott, of Wellington, proceeding along the line of least resistance, proposed the introduction of the Gothenburg system to the King Country, whereby the private profit from the sale of intoxicants would be eliminated. The Government ivould, under this system, have full control and be responsible. The Bishop of Christchurch, though, opposed to license, was “very strongly in favour” of Mr Sprott’s proposal. Indeed, Bishop Julius went further. He desired the Synod to commit itself to a resolution in favour of State management. That seems to be the system that will best suit the requirements of the King Country, and it would be only an extension of the system adopted by the Government at the Mount Cook Hermitage. At all events, the Synod discouraged the “no license campaign for one in favour of a Royal Commission of inquiry.

In sentencing a young man for damaging property a few days ago, Mr Justice Edwards made some observations upon criminality that ought not to be overlooked. His Honour was sorry the man was a native of New Zealand, for hero “a person who was honestly inclined and who displayed an ordinary amount of industry was not under the slightest temptation to become a criminal. In countries like England, and especially in a great metropolis such a 3 London, people were born into criminality and bred in it.” There is here the summarisation of established trufS&r - '- all the metaphysics concerning “original -gin” notwithstanding. Yet criminality, like other diseases, may pass over one generation and break out in another. Mr Edwards is on safe ground when he implies that as far as heredity and environment are concerned, the young people of this colony have been well fortified against inclinations to crime. Besides they are being given a healthy up-bringing iu a magnificent climate,

and if large numbers of our young people become criminals, then the matter ought- to engage the attention of philanthropists. We are told, and figures go to support the assertion, that there has been during the last generation infinitely less crime not only in the colonies, but in Great Britain in'proportion to the population, and that many prisons in old countries are emptying fast. There can be little doubt that the vulgar crimes of rioting and drunkenness are on the decrease; but it may be that crime, like the age, is becoming more scientific and less demonstrative. However, there is a general law in nature that stipulates for the good becoming better and the bad worse. If that is so, men and women may be simply impelled by unseen forces and will live their lives. Still, making all due allowances for heredity, environment and education, the chances are greatly in favour of New Zealand’s having a comparatively '‘clean sheet” as regards criminality.

It can hardly be said that in .suddenly dismissing General Sir Henry Colville Mr Brodriok has begum his career at the War Office auspiciously. Here was an officer whose offence, whatever it was, was literally condoned by his return to his command at Gibraltar. The next- thing is that Sir Henry is cashiered and dismissed the service. But the man who would not fail to keep his appointment with Lord Roberts to be at Heilbron by a certain hour, at. the risk of allowing five hundred veomaury to be captured at Lindley (which actually kappened) is not a man to be trifled with, obedience to his commander was his first consideration. On his way to London he wrote his story of the affair, and since he was refused an audience at the War Office has published it in the columns of the ‘‘Daily Chronicle.” It is a- clear statement and one calculated to enlist popular sympathy, while it reflects in a general way upon the British authorities. Fault- is being found with General Colville for having “rushed into print” over a matter that ought to be heard, according to military discipline, “with closed doors.” The public will in this stand by Sir Henry, and will demand that the fullest- publicity be given to the trial. The courtmartial, as an institution, has been tried and found wanting. The Dreyfus case proved its inadequacy to discover the truth, and it is utterly contrary to British ideals that a trial of a brave soldier should be conducted in secret. On the face of it, it does not appear that General Colville has been fairly treated. If may be that the examination into this case will have fai-reaching effects. Several officers will be involved and the evidence may materially •strengthen the hands of those Commissioners appoint ad to enquire into the doings of the War Office with a view to its reform.