PASSING EVENTS.

New Zealand Mail, 5 February 1902, Page 35

PASSING EVENTS.

History i»P bilosophy teaChi “ g by M —Thucydides. _ ii, e innumerable organisations ' Wffuse liuman energy m the city which dpufw now be included a J'tS " e "? ‘ft n*S Vce and pursue it; but come a time m the history the r ® Hljtish nation similar to that of th o . „ fought against the Amala- • ?valley of Kiphidiin, and it B-.OT Patriots, as it was 0 f all Israelites, to finally overthrow their enean.d eff Tlie resolution of the so-called 11116 is indicative of a lack jl on the part- of its framers 0 history of the South African ° r th Th0 t society “deprecates the ac- ? the Government in sending conb°n o Lt o South Africa to Help in the tmgents self-governing States.” erroneous. The New Sand Government has not sent out for the suppression of self- • SemingStates, but for the express goT \L ß nf repelling the invaders of SS territory and of inflicting such • w,nnon the Empire’s enemies S "ill make for lastmlh.tco.mtry. That the finer oligarchy in the Transvaal invited £ Britain to extinguish it by issu,w an insolent and defiant ultimatum Involving immediate war, was not what ;L British Government sought when it oleaded for, and subsequently insisted on, equal rights being accorded Briton and Boer in the Transvaal. When Great Britain took occasion to protect oar fellow subjects in South Africa, its frontiers from invasion and Cape Colony from rebellion, the Boers declared ' that such action was directed against the independence of the Republic. But that was merely a pretext for making war upon British territory, under cover of which it was also proposed to establish the Boer authority throughout all South Africa. The Kruger regime had undertaken not to subject Britishers or any person other than natives, in respect of their persons or property, to any taxes, whether general or local, other than those which were imposed upon the Boers themselves, and this obligation they shockingly violated. Had the Boers dealt fairly with the Britishers in the Transvaal, there would have been no war. Had the Boers been willing to carry out the terms | of their agreement with Great Britain the outlander population would have hid no grievances, and hostilities would i notkve taken place. Had the Boers in the Transvaal extended to British f the same privileges as the British extend to Boers in Cape Colony, no difference could possibly have arisen. But j the principle established by the British | Constitution that there can be no taxa- ■ tion without representation was not recognised by the Boers, and internal trouble came, with what result we all now know. They hoped to secure their independence by driving the British out of South Africa, and they have failed. The action of the Wellington Peace Society is misguided. The surest way k peace is by a vigorous prosecution of the war and the utter destruction of the seeds of sedition among the ■Boers. It j s only in this way that Peace be thoroughly established, a . n ,. n action of the Government in aiding Great Britain to accomplish that purpose is alike laudable and patriotic.

FnwilHng to offend the Hon. J. See, fr!wT r °. f Ncw South Wales, who similai a ® ainst 11 °t being placed on a to the Premier of New tKp ir u li 10 C° roiia tion ceremonies, in r P nl lg - ht Josc P h Chamberlain, thfl t 0 r ® ee > * ias f ence d with retarl nfsf h 4 fc all events, the Secbeen nc for the Colonies has not as Mr a e< ? a , nc * P°^ n ted in his reply cLmL| e? had ex P ected - When Mr StfP rt-is impossible to ac°n the Samo S f® s rec iuest to place him Federal T ? CVel as Mr Barton, the wealth iir- ei ? I , er ’ 11 'dess the CommonC 'hamberlSr y reeomm onds it, Mr See rtf “ answering a question be dense LrV a f', But : Mr See n™st that in r pnf 6^ d f ie aids t° discover Chamberlain y f S to f lis question Mr that Mr fipdrln baS ndprentially stated terms of Lmlf aild v M - r Barton are on "Jf-SorernSr^l ty ’ i bein - g Premiers of Pire. Mr s g depen d e ncies of the EmProvinee of +f S f Crely Premier of a T'vro tbo nrpf 6 • Commonwealth ; and ment in wLffn /r StGm i 0f g°vernw°uld h 6 ln . , tius „ colony, what indent, 0 f ° Ug lt .°i a superindred to be m p l rovince if he deael d °. n , an equal foot*[th the Premier 111 pH+u l as a cor °nation Chamberlain fn pff! he count ry? Mr comparisL f f says that ther o 1 Ne * sS w b i ' Veen tl,e Premier New Zealanrl a e ' S T> a ' I ld • tlle Premier vf Population ' Pohtical entity, t' e "' South Wai co , un h s in this case. f the federation 3 l°f its individuality fought toYrLf Austr alia; and Mr S OUr for federaL S ° mc salvc fr om his Sff the pain of 1 , ln , 01 'der to mitiBut '’'hat does 1 ft sll & ht humiliation. £ ™k‘° ■*« Si Ito T',, sligh ‘,” mhh ? oya l guest” - 'Mo &Gcldon will trill Peonage r v\ a <<c*istinb° select, and not f R ° yal guests not too numerous:

distinguished personages will be less distinguished and innumerable. Moreover, the British people will pay the hotel bill of the “Royal guest,” and the distinguished personage” will have his paid by the people he represents. The British Government has promised that “all due courtesies” will be extended to “Royal guests” and “distinguished personages” alike, and everything will be done to make their visit as pleasant as possible. But there is no need for Mr See or any State Premier to go to the Coronation. Australia will be represented by the Hon. Mr Barton, and surely New South Wales as a province of the Commonwealth will not be the loser if it instructs Mr See to stay at home and attend to his public business. From a personal point of view, and after what has happened, he would certainly be consulting his own dignity and self-respect if he did not go to London. If Mr See is contending for State rights, and not for personal gratification, then he has failed to make his contention convincing, and it is doubtful if even on broad constitutional grounds he could hope to succeed.

Manufacturing and commercial nations are exhibiting considerable anxiety to obtain a first footing in new markets and a share in the trade of those that exist. Germans are preparing to swoop down upon South Africa, and will rely upon the co-operation of Afrikanders to help them to secure the trade of that British-made territory. Germany is also pushing her interests in the Far East, while Russia is putting forth gigantic efforts both eastward and westward, and is even seeking to extend her commercial relations with Persia and find a harbour on the Red Sea. The Americans are still further protecting their trade, and at the same time encouraging by subsidies shipbuilders and merchants to extend their enterprises. Further increases have been made in the countervailing duty on European sugar by America, but the most important step taken by America is the subsidising of mail steamers built and owned by Americans. The Senate has approved of the principle of paying subsidies for mail and general purposes, and it recommends the establishment of a fortnightly service to New Zealand and Australia, inclusive of Samoa. The Americans mean to capture the trade of the Pacific, not with the aid of such allies as the Germans desire to establish themselves in South Africa, but by the aid of Parliamentary enactments and the payment of large subsidies. Indeed, an effort is to be made by the Americans-to monopolise the carrying trade of the Pacific. If Senator Eyre’s Ship Subsidy Bill becomes law, there are strong reasons for believing that the Americans will succeed to a degree in their design. The same subsidy will be paid by the Americans as is now paid by the British and Canadian Governments to owners of vessels running between Vancouver and Tokio; but the Americans' will make provision for larger and faster ships. The argument for this enterprise is the same as that used by the people in this country who favour the proposal that British mails should be carried by British steamers owned and manned by Britishers. The Americans want American mails and merchandise carried by American steamers, and they are prepared to make considerable sacrifices in the interests of trade and patriotic principles. All this dash, enterprise and expense means that even although the colonies decline to offer the Americans any encouragement to run their steamers to various colonial ports, their steamers are bound to come if they would earn the Washington Government’s subsidy. Already in anticipation of increased subsidies for the running of mail steamers to Japan, China, Australia and New Zealand, several new steamers of eighteen-knot speed and ten thousand tons capacity are on the stocks, and a regular fortnightly service to various ports specified is the main condition of the proposed arrangement. Amid all these evidences of earnest activity for the extension of trade and the monopolising of markets by several nations, what is Great Britain doing towards the maintenance of her trade ? For the most part she has left the nation’s trade interests to the care of her enterprising merchants. That was safe -while Great Britain led the nations in shipping and manufactures, but nowadays no private individual can stand against exclusive legislation and State subsidies. Great Britain'and all her dependencies will require to follow the example of other nations if the nation’s supremacy would be maintained.

Lord Rosebery’s recent speech at Chesterfield is interesting reading. His advice to the Liberal party was pointed, straightforward and honest. “I have come to speak my mind,” his Lordship said, and he declared it to be the first duty of Liberals to secure unity and peace among themselves. It has been manifestly the weakness of the Liberals that they have for years past been as a house divided against itself; and although it is by no means the first time similar advice has been tendered many of its component parts are at variance in policy and principle. Lord Rosebery sees plainly that the bulk of the Liberals are out of touch with the nation at the present crisis in its liistory, so he

again urges the leaders clean their slates and toe the line of national sentiment if they would gain the nation’s confidence and the administration of the -Empire’s affairs. It may he that many are opposed to what they are pleased to term the Jingoism of Mr Chamberlain; ®ut Lord Rosebery showed clearly that while Jingoism was a term of disrespect and contempt affected by opponents of the Salisbury Administration, it was so closely allied to Imperialism that it was_ a stumbling block to many patriotic Liberals in the country to hear their Imperialistic notions denounced in terms of opprobrium. This must be abandoned if Liberalism is to succeed in Great Britain. And so Lord Rose-* bery’s advice is: “On no account must Liberals dissociate themselves from the new sentiment of Empire with which the nation is now imbued.” This sentiment is more than a passing pleasing fancy: it is a passion of affection and family feeling. Out of it we may expect to rise the strongest desires for the unification of the British Empire, as well as the loftiest ambitions of Britons everywhere. And it is probably this sentiment that will make for the further progress and stability of the Anglo-Saxon people. It remains to ,be seen % whether the Liberals will accept Lord Rosebery’s advice, or whether they will still “sit with fly-blown phylacteries bound round their obsolete policy.”

There was one part of Lord Rosebery’s speech that is deserving of more than passing notice at this hour of our national history. We do not refer to his attitude on the war, for that is as sane as any man’s could be whose aims are Imperial and whose sympathies are patriotic. He urged a vigorous prosecution of the war to a finish, and afterwards a liberal line of policy towards self-government. But that was not the part of Lord Rosebery’s speech to which we have alluded. It was his reference to party government and national opinion. After assuring his audience that ins services were at the disposal of his country, Lord Rosebery proceeded: “I am quite aware that my policy does not run on party lines, but it is not to party that I appeal. Party in this matter can avail little or nothing. I appeal unto Ctesar. From Parliament with its half-hearted but, overwhelming Government majority and its distracted and disunited Opposition, I appeal to the silent but supreme tribunal of public opinion, that of common-sense. If that fail us we are lost indeed, and I know of nothing else that remains to avail us.” If Lord Rosebery would succeed in moulding and fashioning public opinion on the lines of his able and patriotic speech, he must enter upon a campaign as vigorous as that pursued by his illustrious predecessor, Mr Gladstone, in 1881, when he literally “swept the country.” Lord Rosebery has brain and ability equal to the occasion, but has he the executive power and energy to undertake it ? Failing a great effort on the former Premier’s part, British politics may still remain in an indefinite and lachrymose condition, the strength of the Government being the ill-assort-ed state of the Liberal party.