The Otago Witness. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE SOUTHERN MERCURY. (TUESDAY, MAY 20, 1924.) THE WEEK.

Otago Witness, Issue 3662, 20 May 1924, Page 43

The Otago Witness. WITH WHICH IS INCORPORATED THE SOUTHERN MERCURY. (TUESDAY, MAY 20, 1924.) THE WEEK.

"Nunquam allud natura, allud sapientia dixit.* —Jtjvexal. “Good nature and good sense must ever join.”—• Pope. There can be little doubt that Liberalism, as a political force in the 111-Liberalism. Dominion is seriously ill. There are indications that it is sick unto death; wherefore it is not altogether fanciful to dub tlve little knob of members ill Parliament who acknowledge allegiance to Mr Wilfcrd as the 111Liberals. Moreover, these 111-Liberals answer to the name in quite another respect. Were they really Liberal . in. thought and action, and desirous of putting their country’s good above the prejudices of personality and the petty claims of outworn partisanship, they would recognise that there is actually no question of principle dividing them from the Government whilst, as Mr Wilford himself loudly proclaims they have no kinship with, the official Labour Party under Mr Holland. This being the plain fact of the care, the time is ripe for these 111-Liberals to come into the Government camp, and in so doing relieve the country from the oppression which the shadow of another general election represents. No sensible person desires the trouble and turmoil of another parliamentary contest, and it is safe to say that a majority of the electors do not want a change of Government; but so long as Mr Massey is condemned to carry on the business of administration, under the existing state of parties there always remains the possibility that he may be forced to a dissolution. Truth to tell, Mr Wilford in the campaign on which he has just entered is sitting on an extremely insecure rail. He professes to champion a Liberal-Labourism which is poles apart from extreme Labour. At the same time he hesitates to embark upon an antiSocialistic crusade such as Mr Lloyd George delights to indulge in. It may fairly 5 be argued that the Reform Party a attitude to Labour embodies all and more than is comprehended in Mr Vv liford s programme, and that between the two stools occupied respectively by Air Massey and Mr Holland the disappearing remnant of a defunct pseudo liberalism falls to the ground. It is safe to predict, therefore, that Mr Wilford will henceforth be known as the apostle of 111-Liberalism.

“He won’t be happy till he gets it” represents the attitude of Auckland towards many desirable objects, such, for instance, as a medicaL school, a dental school, an engineering school, and what not. Especially did the aspirations of Auckland reach out towards the possession of the much coveted Yale Telescope, wherewith to annihilate distance, and more particularly to bring within the purview of the average Aucklander the existence of a small insignificant citv in the south, known as Dunedin. Alas for Auckland’s hopes, the authorities of Yale University, after making certain atmospheric tests, have decided that the northern city is not suitable for setting up the powerful telescope, which, upon certain conditions, they were willing to donate to New Zealand, and they are now turning their attention to South Afuca. The <doom that has settled upon Auckland upon’receipt of the news of this untoward decision may better be imagined than described. At least the people of Auckland can console themselves with the idea that if thev cannot have the Yale Telescope, neither is it going to Dunedin. The dog-in-the-manger policy invariably adopted by some of Auckland’s public men towards the rest of the Dominion has had its reward in this respect. The climate of Central Otago has been officially certified as in all respects ideal for the establishment of an observatory, and had the atmospheric tests conducted in Auckland been also cai’ried out in Central Otago, there is more than a possibility that" the Y'ale Telescope might have remained in New Zealand instead of going to South Africa.

Unhappy Auckland.

Is it possible to belong to the Navy League and at the same time to be a consistent supporter of the League of Nations? This question, to. which “ITeet Week,” with its consequent festivities, has given both prominence and visibility, was "revived during a discussion at the Secondary Schools’ Conference held in Wellington last week. Mr F. .Milner, head of the Waitaki Boys’ High School, tabled a resolution in favour of the League of Nations which suggested the advisability of “familiarising all pupils with the or-o-anisation, achievements, and possibilities of the League.” Speaking in support of the resolution Mr Milner avowed liimself a supporter of the Navy League as well as of the League of Nations. This, however. did not satisfy some of those present, one speaker in particular objecting that if the resolution was carried in the form proposed it might be regarded as propaganda *against the Navy League, and therefore not patriotic. This speaker declared that “every blow struck at the

Navy League and the League ot Nations.

British Navy at tlie present time was a disloyal one/’ and at ins suggestion, and with* the concurrence of Mr Milner, the motion expressing sympathy with the -League of Nations also contained the wotds “while admitting the necessity under the present conditions of maintaining an efficient navy/’ and in that form it had unanimous support. Hie incident is instinctive as proving the jiossibility of harmonising the work of the two Leagues and revealing the absolute consistency of membership in both. file Navy is a present-day fact with a glorious audition; the League of Nations is an equally glorious ideal, and the glorious tradition of the British Navy leads direct to the glorious realisation of the ideal of ihe League of Nations. Thus the two are complementary, and should in no wise be regaided as antagonistic, ft is only unwise paitisanship which brings in the element of antagonism. And while there is a growing opinion among the nations in support of the restriction of armaments, even under the most favourable conditions ihe necessity for the British _\avy will remain for many yc-ars to come.

The visit to London of the King and Queen of Rumania has been made the occasion of much festivity, accompanied by a show of pageantry so dear to the heart of the average Englishman. The visit, however, possesses a double significance, political as wed as social, which should not be lost sight of. Ihe political bearing of the visit to England of King Ferdinand and Queen Marie is concerned with the dispute between Soviet Russia and Rumania in regard to Bessarabia, the critical stage the dispute has reached being reflected in the newspaper rumour that Russia is secretly mobilising on the Bessarabian frontier. \\ hen to this is added the report that Trotsky is trying his hardest to instil a martial spirit into the Red Army by '‘unfolding vistas of great and glorious revolutionary wars, the danger ot hostilities between Russia and Rumania will be seen to be imminent. Fox - some time past Mr MacDonald has been endeavouring to discover a foundation upon which Great Britain may soundly proceed to a recognition of Soviet Russia, and the visit to England of the King and Queen of Rumania must be read in the light of this proposed recognition. It is generally recognised that m the direction of the affairs of Rumania, the Queen is the dominant influence, the King being little more than a figurehead, and it must not be forgotten that Queen Marie is an Englishwoman. In his bonk on "in timate Accounts of Royalty” Mr Frederick Collins dubs Queen Marie “the Woman Charlemagne,” and says: ‘‘Thanks to Marie’s personal prestige and her success as a royal match-maker, King Ferdinand sits on a throne which is potentially one of the strongest in Europe.” To which he adds that Marie ‘‘is the Queen, the greatest monarch, and the cleverest diplomat in Europe.” What follows, whether well grounded or not, is at least Intensely interesting: While doddering old men, worn out by a war they never understood, are rattling around in the shoes of Disraeli and Gladstone and Mazinni and Richelieu, playing gingerly with that strange ineffective thing, the new diplomacy, Marie of Rumania, by her woman's wit, is marrying an empire. The day of government bv marriage is said to be past. And perhaps it is in Western Europe. But the countries of South-eastern Europe are not yet enjoying the same day as their sister nations in the west. They are just now approaching; perhaps in Marie’s lifetime they will have reached the condition which made possible the Austro-Hun-garian Empire, a polyglot collection of fifty-five million souls, united for more than a hundred years solely by the bends of the Hapsburg marriages. tt took the greatest war in history to burst those bonds. It may be that the Rumanian marriages will be just as durable.

The Rumanian Royalties

I rom an American source comes the report that Queen Marie has it in her mind to marry her beautiful fifteen-year-old daughter, the Princess Ileana, to the Prince of Wales, and that her main object in visiting England was to arrange, it possible, the betrothal. Whether or no there are good grounds for the rumour, it presents all manner of instructive possibilities. Queen Marie, before her maniage to King Ferdinand, was the Princess of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, whose father, the Duke of Edinburgh, married Marie, the only daughter of Alexander 11, Emperor of Russia. And the Duke of Edinburgh was brother to Edward VII and uncle of the present King, which makes the Prince of Wales and tire Princess Ileana second cousins. Moreover, Ferdinand is a Prince of the house of Hohenzollern, which increases the family complications. So that the marriage of the Piiuce of Wales to the Princess Ileana would re-unite the strains of the late ruling houses of Russia and Germany with that of England, a most remarkable combination. If Mr Collins is to be believed Queen Marie has been so successful in her Royal match-making that the union between the Prince and the Princess may speedily be a. fait accompli. “Since the spring of 1921,’’ he writes, “life with Queen Marie has been just one trousseau after another. First there were the weddings that tied Rumania and Greece in double bow-knots. Then there was the ceremony last spring that united the princeling Alexander of Jugc-Slavia to the vigorous Princess Marie. Next—and as soon as war wounds heal and the beautiful fourteen year-old Ileana puts up her hair—there is Doris of Bulgaria waiting to join the royal household.” Apparently Queen Marie has changed her mind, and prefers the Prince of Wales as son-in-law. The alteration

renders Mr Collins’ commentary all the more readable. Of Marie he writes: As a queen she is the most picturesque, perhaps the most powerful woman in the world. Her own country, at the time of the accession to the throne, was one of the smallest and least known cf the Balkan nations. r>y keeping it steadfastly on the side of the Allies when her Bulgarian neighbour was lining up with the enemy, Marie strengthened her position both morally and materially. And by a series of brilliant marriages she has laid the foundation for a vast Balkan Empire—larger than France, as large as England. A great Queen, Marie! And it is just possible that she may • be a major factor in establishing and maintaining the peace of the world, j For she has achieved what many statesj men have tried for but none have ever j approached, a basis of Balkan unity. She has brought forty-one million people under her distaff.

Bride tc the Prince of Wales