PASSING NOTES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 26541, 16 August 1947, Page 2

PASSING NOTES

Like other guides, as some folk say, Who neither lead nor tell tHte way. Surely the Archbishop of Canterbury struck the wrong note when, he described Britons as “ the poor relations of everyone in the world ” and added that the average citizen did not realise that the nation was near to fundamental disaster. This is not the voice of a great spiritual leader. If we had not been told who was speaking we might have thought it came from some Wall Street banker or some hard-boiled financier. It concerns itself merely with material things which belong to the world of Mammqp; but these -are not the things which finally decide the fate and destiny of a nation. @ No, no! Your Grace of Canterbury, Britain’s poverty is an honourable poverty which does by no means make her a poor relation of anyone. It is to her eternal glory that she overtaxed her strength and poured out blood and treasure to save the world. None of her allies made sacrifices on the same scale as Britain though they all solemnly contracted to do so and on any fair computation they are poor relations of Britain.

Languor Is not in your heart, Weakness is not in your word, Weariness not on your brow. —Arnold. How strange that your Grace, as the ecclesiastical head of the National Church of England, should utter no word of encouragement to so brave a nation fighting for recovery against such fearful odds. Even if your talk of fundamental disaster became a reality (which it will not) might you not truly say of Britain, “ Others she saved, herself she could not save ”? There seems something like smug satisfaction in your remarks that it may not be a bad thing that owing to her poverty Britain “ can no longer impose her will throughout —.the' world.” Should you not rather deeply regret the fact that your nation, which was the greatest and most humane trustee the world ever knew, can no longer spend herself in protecting backward races, in patiently teaching them to govern themselves, in playing the Good Samaritan to exiles and refugees seeking sanctuary from oppression, and in sweeping the seas of pirates and slave-hunters?* Do you wonder if in this crisis your people turn for guidance to the greatest living Englishman, Mr Churchill, who knows the unrivalled splendour of their moral courage and the greatness of their character? I need only recall the inspiring trumpet call he issued a few days ago when he said: Whatever may be the difficulties the British people will not be found unequal to them. We shall come through and continue to be the guide and symbol to the world of the i way in which a free and decent life may be lived by citizens of this ancient land.

Surely, your Grace, this is better than telling them that they are the poor relations of everyone in the world.

He is well paid that is well satisfied.—Shakespeare. By this simple test laid down by Shakespeare no pne is well paid in New Zealand, for no one seems satisfied. We have heard about dirt money and danger money, and now comes a third D—called drudgery money which the suppliers of milk want increased “to compensate for the extra drudgery associated with their calling.” By all means let us pay drudgery money if it is needed to keep up the milk supply for an alarming number of farmers have dispersed their herds in recent years. A milk farmer’s life is hard, and he should be well paid for working in the dark, wet nights with sleet. ,snow and frost while we lie abed. But if we give the milkman drudgery money why not give all who work indoors “indoor money” for getting less sun than, the farmer? Why not give policemen, tramway men, and shop assistants “ foot and leg money ” for being on their feet all day? Where will we stop? Should not the watersiders get “ temptation money ” for their stern refusal to pillage, cargo? Perhaps the editor will allow me “ fountain-pen-and-ink money ” for writing Passing Notes.

Courage to ask questions; courage to expose our ignorance.—Emerson. In exposing my ignorance last week about the story of a tramp who left a beautiful willy I little thought that my inquiry would bring me what Hollywood might call a fan mail. Letters poured in from Oamaru, Roxburgh Waikouaiti, Herbert, Dunedin, and elsewhere, and I began to think I was the only person who had never read the story. I am most grateful to all these correspondents, some of whom sent copies of the will. \ Unfortunately it is too long to publish, but I will post one copy to the Correspondent who asked for the information. The Will was written by a lawyer named Charles Lownsberry, who died insane in a Chicago poorhpuse. It was read before the Chicago Bar Association, which passed a resolution that it be probated. Now it is on the record of Cook County, Illinois. One correspondent says it was reproduced in the Public Service Journal, January, 1938, as “The most beautiful will ever written.”

Then he will talk: Lord, how he will talk.—Old play. '• An official whose lengthy title is Director of the Industrial Psychology Division of the Department of Scientific and Industrial Research announced recently that— Talking is the best medicine for industrial discontent. I am not sure that it is not the only medicine that

ever works If, this principle is sound we should enjoy perpetual industrial peace in New Zealand. For the cardinal feature of all our machinery for settling industrial disputes is based on talk. It begins with the Conciliation Councils, where the employers and workers argue for days and perhaps weeks. If this fails they proceed to talk and wrangle for days and weeks before the Arbitration Court. Sometimes special tribunals are get up and there is more talk. Indeed, what are stopwork meetings for bu£ to enable the workers to discuss tneir grievances? Most factories have dispute committees for the very purpose of settling disputes. What is Parliament but an open forum for talk? But all these provisions assume that both parties will give and take, otherwise the talk is a waste of time. Moreover, in times of prosperity wages will rise and in a depression they will fall in spite of all the talk that may be employed.

Here are two letters about the pronunciation of Galileo. (1) Dear Clvis,—Your pronunciation of Galileo will probably meet with some disfavour But you need not cry " Peccavi ” despite the authority's There is no way of deciding the righl accent of English words, e.g., some accent “ interested ” on the firs! syllable, some on the third. Many accent " decadent ” on the first syllable; yet I heard the distinguished classical scholar, J. W. Mackail, in a lecture accent it very decisively on the second syllable. Some accent “ laboratory ” on the first syllable and then have four distinct syllables following. The Americans accent the second and fourth syllables. “Alexandria ” to a classical scholar has the , stress on the “i ” not on " an.” Byron ( accents “ Trafalgar" on the last syllable.” . . In “ Galileo ” I prefer the accent on the “ e,” but when accenting thus I was always conscious that the pronunciation you give ' was in common use. To language usage may be applied Galileo’s own words * E pur si muove.” R. L. (2) Dear Civls,—May 1 comment on , the pronunciation of Gal-11-e-o? As you say. it appears to be a choice between accenting the second or the third" syllable. But. if I have heard correctly, the third syllable, when it . is accented, is I think pronounced " ay,” not “ e.”—Yours. Gal-il-a-o. Civis.