PASSING NOTES.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 6789, 17 November 1883, Page 2 (Supplement)

PASSING NOTES.

(From Otago Witnosß.) TThe whola philosophy of tha Mitcholson apJpointraent may bo set forth, aa in a parable, thnSagh the medium of a little story told by Sforace Mayhew, author of " London Labour ■and tha London Poor." Mayhow once joined a league for the suppression of " tips" to waiters. Lunching one day, he began to feel nervous as the time for paying tho bill arrived, but finally mustered courage to say, " William, lam sorry for you, buE I have joined the •No-tippers.'" "Well, Mr May how," answered William mildly, " as you are an old customer, I don't mind telling you that I have joined a rum lot too. We've bound ourselves to upset hot dishes by accident over ttio lega of stingy customers." Auckland is tho "William" of this incident, the Mitchelson appointment ia the "tip" which the Government offers to keep the Aucklanders from upsetting hot dishes over its lega. And these are the principles on which wo are governed! Until Ue was made Minister for Public Works who Ltd ever heard of Mitchelson ? Not one in a iheusand of tho electors of New Zealand knew there was such a person in existonco. I read Hansard—for my sins, Ido !—but I confess and protest that not oven in those classic pag^as did I ever, so far as memory serves, encounter tho name of Mitchelson. It is possible, of course, that the now Minister may bo a heaven-born statesman just dropped from the clouds, in which case he must have dropped in the neighbourhood of Auckland. That is possible, but all that is certain is that be is reckoned an Aucklander, and that the Aucklandera had to be "tipped." In selfdefence, aud to secure our own just shr.ro of •' tips," we shall have to join tho league for spilling hot dishes over the less of stingy

Governments,

Excellent soeeches, most of them, at the Imther celebration, yet all—or nearly allvitiated by one huge fallax^- of which the epeskors themselves seemed happily unconscious. Luther's great merit (so they agreed) Was that he judged for himself and stuck to ■his own opinion spite of Church and Diet, Pope and Emperor. Called on to "retract" he replied that he would not retract "unless •convinced by the testimony of Scripture or evident reason " —reason made evident to him, Martin Luther. Authority was nothing. Authorities had xl frequently erred and contradicted each other,"" wherefore he, Luther, •had resolved to settle all doctrine for himself by his «wn notions of " Scripture and evident tea,**." By taking this stand the Reformer fe*d vindicated for himself and all men tho *' right of private judgment." So said the clerical orators, and rejoiced together in the •comfort of r. great and glorious principle Yet it is a fact that not one of them acts on the principle himseif, or would sanction the use of at in anybmiy else. Imagine the case of nn heretical minister brought before the Presby-; tery fov erroneous doctrine—wanting to abolish tbo Sabbath, say, or, what is equally bad, to ferae the Wostmiuster Confession. "Retract," says the venerable Court.. "I will not . retract," replies the erring brother, " till con' vicced by Scripture or evident reason." " Here stand I," he continues, " I can no other; God help me; Amen V— like Luther at the Diet of Worms. What will the venerable ■Court do withfthis irapracticablo Lutheran? Unquestionably, they will turn him out, and bis " right of private judgment" along with him. Moreover, the only place that will take him in—as long as he persists in despising authorities and thinking out a system of tho "universe for himself — h the Lyceum. Curious result, this, from the glorious principle of " private'judgment!" For my own part, as I don't believe in tho Lyceum, and hold that the Presbytery in the case supposed would be entirely right, I am constrained to think that there must be something wrong about the glorious principle

We ate hearing a little too much about Lather, and shall soon begin to be bored. But then—as Mrs Civis sagely remarked anent the long speeches at Knox Church—"it comes only once in four hundred years." From that point of view we can afford to ba patient. The "quater-centenary" won't trouble us again. Here is a correspondent who seems to " speak by the card":—

Dear Civis,—As you appear to have constiLutherV I send you the following. Originally I meant it as a letter to the Daily Times, but you have the better claim.