The Otago Witness. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE SOUTHERN MERCURY. (TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1923.) THE WEEK.

Otago Witness, Issue 3595, 6 February 1923, Page 39

The Otago Witness. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE SOUTHERN MERCURY. (TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 1923.) THE WEEK.

•'Nnnquam allud natura, allud sapienUa dixit." —JUVENAL. "Good nature and good sense mast ever ioln. form. To-morrow (Wednesday) Parliament will meet for a special session, for the express purpose of deciding whether the Government has a majority in newiy elected House of Representatives. The interest attendant on this decision is heightened by the fact that no one, not even Mr Massey himself, is able to accurately forecast the trend of events. In a House which, excluding the Speaker, consists of 79 members, the Reform Party can be certain of 38 votes, beyond that it is impossible to go. Should two only of the other members who are not definitely pledged to vote against the Government elect to support Mr Massey on a want-of-confidence motion the Government will be able to claim a majority, and all interest in the special session will end. If Mr Massey, however, fails to attract to his party the necessary two votes, tile floodgates will be opened, and all manner of eventualities present themselves. It may be taken for granted that every effort will be put forth to avoid another general election. Apart, altogether from the expense and general unsettlement of another appeal to the country, it may shrewdly be surmised that the possibility of another election will be adversely viewed alike by individual members and by the party leaders. So many of the contests were decided by narrow majorities that the members concerned will not be anxious to undergo so strenuous a test again, and even those who regard their seats as sure are naturally anxious to avoid the fatigue and unpleasantness of a second electioneering campaign. In regard to the three parties and their respective leaders, the situation is easily summarised. Mr Massey's hopes of continuing in power rest upon his ability to detach sufficient of the Independents and hangers on of the Liberal Partv a« will give him a work ing majority, and presumably he may have to scatter some political favours in order to secure that majority. Mr Wilford is manifestly playing a waiting game, since not sufficiently strong to form a Liberal Government, should Mr Massey be defeated, he holds the balance of power between the other two parties. As to Mr Holland, it may be judged that the continuance in power of the 'Reform Government will best suit his book. It will be his aim to utilise his increase of strength in order to harass Mr Massey at every turn and to endeavour to discredit the Reform Government with the hope of a Labour victory at the polls three years hence. In the midst of all this political uncertainty at least one thing appears to be taken for granted—-viz., the election of Mr Statham to the Speakership. It seems to be accepted by members of all parties that this selection will be unanimously agreed to bv the House, and there is a general testimony to Mr Statham’s fitness for the position. The gratifying rise in the price of wool, as shown in the records reached at the Dunedin sale, needs to be considered in its relation to the ballot recently, conducted by the Alliance of Labour on the question of a general strike as a protest agamst the recent reduction in wages. It has been stated by the chairman of the Woolbrokers’ Association that the prices realised in Dunedin for the wool offered “have more than exceeded the wildest dreams of the producers, notwithstanding which there was a tendency on the part of a few growers to hold their wool for still higher prices.” One other remark in the same connection is matter for reflection. “High prices for primary products generally mean prosperity for the people as a whole, but they also generally mean that the people as a whole have to pay extra for their wants.” In close relation to such a statement comes the announcement that a ballot—“the largest and most complete ever taken in the history of Labour in New Zealand” —was in favour of a cessation of work as a protest against wages reduction. It is further stated that the decision of the ballot had been handed on to the National Executive of the Alliance of Labour, “who would exercise its own judgment as to wliat should be done in connection with the matter.” The saving clause in the statement was the Tider: '“lt was hoped that bv negotiation industrial difficultv would be avoided.” The thoughtful will herein discern a difficult situation calling for delicate and tactful handling. Admittedly high prices for primary product is the wav opt for New Zealand in the financial embarrassments by which she is surrounded, and a continuance of these high prices would enable the Government to more sneedilv relieve the people of the burden of too heavy taxation. Admittedly. too. anything in the shape of a general strike would be the most trono. costly and wasteful proceeding 1 * to which the workers could commit the Dominion. The experience of the recent seamen’s strike illustrates onlv too forcibly how futile and mischievous are such obstructive tactics. At the same time it would be follv to exnect that the workers as a class will tamelv submit to further Wage reduction, without protest, if the present tendency towards increased prices for the essentials of living be maintained and continued. The situation is snch as should lead to an abstention from denunciation on both sides together with an endeavour to clear the ground and estab-

The Opening of Parliament.

The Price of Wool and the Cost of Living.

iish a good understanding. Properly viewed, tne interests of wool grower and wharf labourer are one and the same, both being members of the great New Zealand family. If only this idea of the family takes hold of the entire community it will be seen that if one suffers ail suffer and if one prospers the prosperity extends to all. It is still difficult to arrive at safe conclusions respecting the French occupation of the Ruhr, since the reports emanating respectively from. Paris and from Berlin are decidedly conflicting. The German Government has announced its determination “to resist to every available means to frustrate the hrench policy of violence”; whilst the French attitude as expressed in the words of M. Poincare is: “We shall remain in. the Ruhr as long as is necessary—noi a day more.” The latest action of France is the attempt to isolate the Ruhr from the rest of Germany, and how this attempt will be permanently successful remains to be seen. Presumably there will be other turns of the screw with the idea of securing Germany's submission. On the other hand, Germany's measures of passive resistance are by no means exhausted, and the continuance of present tactics on the part of both France and Germany may mean an inordinate prolongation of a wasteful and mischievous struggle for .supremacy. The cost to France of the maintenance of her army of occupation must be enormous, and this on top of a financial embarrassment sufficiently crushing. Moreover to Germany the French occupation, with the cutting off of the supplies of coal so essential to German industrialism, spells a real stoppage in her path of economic rehabilitation. To an outsider the existing situation is simply suicidal, but it shows the extent to which national obstinacy and obduracy may go. The sensible way out is surely an appeal to the League of Nations, and it is satisfactory to note, in the face of so much chaos and disorder, that the League of Nations idea is slowly but surely asserting itself as the only path to peace and the settlement of disputes. Tile failure of the Lausanne Conference is a sure sign that the complexities of the Near Fiastem question can only be unravelled at Geneva, and to this conclusion Turkey must ' come sooner or later. .In like manner France must be content to submit her claims on Germany to the decision of the League unless she wishes to see Germany thrown into the arms of Bolshevik Russia. The economic pressure which France is applying to Russia has at its back sheer military compulsion, and herein is its danger. ' The economic pirssure which the League of Nations canexert takes the form of moral suasion, and is on that account more compelling and devoid of danger. After protracted negotiations a procedure for the discharge of Britain’s debt to America on a-ccount of the war na.i at length been evolved, to which Britain has assented, and it is predicted that the necessary legislation will pass in both branches of Congress during the present session, becoming lmmediatelv effective. Into the details of' the arrangement it is not necessary to go, they are largely matter for the financial experts. The main i>oint is that Britain has resolute.lv resolved to face end discharge her obligations, although in i doing she assumes another heavy financial burden on the top of those she nas already shouldered. In an illuminating article* Mr Lloyd Geortre draws a striking comparison between the way in which Britain and France respectivelv have faced the financial burdens of the war. The ex-Prime Minister points out that t'"e war left Britain n creditor nation to t' o extent of £200.000.000 and a debtor nation for half that amount. But white Britain evinced even- readiness to discus* terms and methods of repayment w'th her creditors, her debtors showed a de we to avoid the subjects. The mournful implication is that while Britain is bent on Daving her war debts, and therebv nine'’" her national credit or a sure and. sound foundation, therebv inducing paerx-Hv and putting an end to unemployment, prance is engaged in a costly militar”adventure and endeavouring to coum-d Germanv to pav at. the noint of t’-e bavonet. Thus in Brit-on the n,irehasi"-r power of currency is Twin-T and the co-t, of livintr v falling, while in France t’“ reverse is the ease. Mr Llovd Geor-c - , article is instinet with a moral which he *who runs mav read.

France on the Ruhr.

Britain’s Debt to America.