SHIPPING NEWS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3520, 30 August 1921, Page 44

SHIPPING NEWS.

MOVEMENTS OF OVERSEA VESSELS. The Dorset arrived at Auckland from Liverpool on the 22nd inst. The West Ilixton arrived at Adelaide from San Francisco and Auckland on the 21st inst. The Rimutaka arrived at Wellington from Southampton on the 23rd inst. The Port, Napier arrived at Panama from Wellington on the 21st inst. The Pori Kemble, arivecl at Norfolk from Wellington on the 21st inst. The Waikawa lefi San Francisco for Auckland on (lie 21st inst,. The Wa.imana left London for Wellington on the 21st inst. The Woodarra arrived at London from Wellington on the 22nd inst. The Peshawur arrived at London front Wellington on tho 22nd inst. The Alamari arrived at London from Wellington on the 22nd inst. The Eastern Planet, arrived at Dunedin, via northern ports, from New York on tho 24th inst. The Wangaratta arrived at Norfolk (Ya.) from Wellington on the 23rd inst. The Suffolk arrived at Liverpool from Wellington on the 23rd inst. The ATakirra arrived at Auckland from Vancouver on the 26th inst. The Tahiti arrived at San Francisco from Wellington on the 24th inst. The Otarama left Alontreat for Auckland on the 24th inst. The Surrey arrived at London from Lvttelton on the 24th inst. The A theme arrived at Wellington from Southampton on the 28ih inst. The Canadian Mariner left Vancouver for Wellington on ihc 26th inst.

GOVERNMENTS AND THE PR ESS. A POl.i 111 \I. OI’AKRLL i ii(* cable v;i:U.h reache-.i tho lioi*:i iii*in (iiiiiiiu Ihm iiK iith concern mj' the <i i.irrei bi t Moci. tin* Rnti.-h tiovcrnmciil it * Ford XortUciiile vv.-it? necessarily madcijnaie 1!l cerriiu mg particular's, ihc ioroiito Glube of July IJ supp ios certain discrepance, ;$ in die -lory, anti luti*a *ns> ;in iutmesiiiig d. -patch from its Eondon cilice. ihe trouble began on July 13. when Ibe J it'll':-, in a leading editorial on the Washington Conference, protested against either Ah Lloyd Clcurge or Lord Curzon representing Britain;- Mr Lloyd (Jeorg • because he is distrusted as too magnetic, and Lord ( utzon because "the pompous and pretention-' manner of the Foreign Secretary, his business incapacity. a> exhibited iti the pre;v nt state of the department, and his obsequious docility to rhe Prime Minister’s b h >ts. even when these may not commend tnem.-clves to his judgment, unfit him b r the discharge of the responsible duties w hi<. h the mission would impose upon him.” Lord Curzon immediately countered by ordering the exclusion of all the representatives of the Northciitfe papers from (lie Foreign Office and from all sources of news under his control. The Times next day said: “In the course of its long history, The Times often has had to discharge a painful duty in criticising the shortcomings of Foreign Secretaries, and opposing, sometimes violently, the vagaries of their policies. Some of those Foreign Secretaries have, in consequence, visited us with their displeasure, and have lived to regret such ebul irions of wounded vanity.” The correspondent of the Globe and the New York Times sent the following despatch : Fleet Street opinion on the boycott of the Northciitfe Dress by the Foreign Office is affected by the long-standing vendetta between Lord Northciitfe and Air Lloyd George. It, is regarded as one more sceno in an interesting political and journalistic drama, and the editors of the leading newspapers prefer to comment on it from that point of view. All, without exception, condemn it ::s childish and ineffective, and (1 oiare it has put the Foreign Office in an impossible position. Ii must climb down sooner or later, and it will find that the information it so greatly cherishes will reach The Times at Printing House Square, and the Daily Alail at Carmelite House, in a manner that will surprise but may not delight it. Mr J. A. Spender, editor of the Westminster Gazette, in talking about the boycott. said : “ I think I would describe it, not so much as an attack on the liberty of the press, as an insidious manoeuvre which might lead towards the bribery of the press. If the idea was once accepted that news would be given out only to newspapers which supported the Government, the result would he most dangerous. But if that were to happen, all Fleet street would make common cause and rebel.” Mr J. Stuart Hodgson, editor of the Daily Nows, thought Lord Curzon’s attitude was cuite impossible, and he raised the question of its propriety. “It seems to me,” he said, “an attempt to hamper a newspaper in the performance of its functions. It is rhe duty of a newspaper to publish news of public interest and importance, arid it is the duty of a Government office to give out such information as the public ought to know. What right, then, has Lord Curzon to claim private control over publio news, and to withhold it from a newspaper because it does not, please, him?” Mr Ralph Blumenfeld, editor of the Daily Express, thought the boycott was nothing more than an ill-advised attempt to discipline the Northcliffe press, and -refused to take it more seriously. “It is foolish, and will bo ineffective,” he said.

“Every Government department lias its publicity department nowadays, but it is absurd to suggest that big newspapers are dependent on them for their news. They only give out the news that the Government want to be published, and we always trv to confirm it from other sources.” The Evening Standard saw in the proscription against the Northcliffe press “a precedent capable of grave abuse,” but it criticised Lord Curzon’s action rather on the ground that he has given The Times attack an importance which, as regards his particular case, it certainly does not deserve. “Lawyers make a sharp distinction.” it continued, “between genuinely libellous utterance and what- they regard as mere billingsgate. One is actionable, however decorously expressed; the other is not esteemed an injury. The references to Lord Curzon were merely abusive, and leave him precisely where he was in the view of ordinarily'discriminating people.” The Star said the Government’s measures “set up a dangerous doctrine, that a newspaper which dares to criticise Mr Lloyd George, or that most superior Lord Curzon, Foreign Minister, in violent terms, is to be deprived of information about, public affairs " which it would otherwise be deemed good by the Coalition to impart to the public through its means. This is a kind of embargo that cannot long be maintained, especially in this instance. There are too many blockade-runners and bootleggers and rum-runners in Whitehall arid Westminster for Mr Lloyd George s i.evv embargo to last long. Lord Northcliffe himself made a long statement, in the course of which he said: **'phey know nothing about the management'of newspapers. They do not realise that if the Government attacks one newspaper other newspapers come to its help. Mv newspapers, therefore, now present as good a share of Government news as tf'ie others, and for several reasons. One is that the Government offices are always leaky where news is concerned, and another is that other publishers come to my rescue, knowing that I should come to theirs if they were similarly attacked.”

A Palmerston North grocer states that a well-known New Zealand firm of jam manufacturers is at present charging 10s per dozen for jams which, before the war, could be purchased for 4s 9d per dozen, and yet the Government puts an embargo on imported jams. A daring joy rider at Masterton appropriated the motor ear of the Stipendiary Magistrate from behind a picture theatre. It was found next morning some distance out of town