THE SESSION.

Observer, Volume XXXII, Issue 23, 17 February 1912, Page 2

THE SESSION.

We Want Political Rest.

THE session which is commencing *in Wellington this week, no

matter what party may come into power, heralds a period of political rest for New Zealand. There may be strife between contending parties, which, does no harm to the community as a whole, but we shall, at all events, be free from the harassing menace of fresh contentious legislation. Neither side is strong enough to press what it regards as its policy measures, which is "something to be thankful for, because in the last twenty years we have passed more laws than we can assimilate, or even thoroughly understand in a century. We don't want more laws. We require to carefully study those we have already passed, with the. object of simplifying them, and we ought certainly to proceed to repeal those that are oppressive and that favour one section of the community more than another.

While our sympathies are strongly on the side of Liberalism, we are convinced that much of the legislation of the last few years is not Liberal, and more especially that forced upon the country at the dictation of the Labour agitators and bosses. That is why we believe the Labour party, in the desire to remove Sir Joseph Ward from power, has done New Zealand splendid service by taking away his working majority. The Labour tiger has allowed its teeth to be drawn for a period of three years. Now, it can only harmlessly snarl, and in the 'meantime, the "people will have time to sit thoughtfully down and consider how far, at the dictation of aggressive trades unionism, we have allowed ourselves to. drift from the Liberal track.

For example, two cooks or waiters employed in a Palmerston North hotel refused, for reasons of their own, to join the local union, and a hotelkeeper was fined twenty shillings last week for employing them. And yet trades unionists, at their meetings, venture to talk frenzied claptrap about the liberty of the subject. Is there either freedom or liberty under a system which dragoons men into compulsory membership of a union where they become mere serfs and slaves to the Labour boss ? There is much to say for trades unionism so long as its guiding principle is defence and not defiance. With most of our anions, however, defiance appears to be the motto at the persent time, and if men in those particular' trades decline to associate .themselves with the unions then they ought not to be coerced into submission. This is not consistent with the spirit of Liberalism. Certainly, it is wrong that an employer should be fined for giving employment to men of independent spirit. Any law that makes such things possible should be repealed.

It goes without saying, whether oppressive laws of this kind are removed from the statute book or not, that no more of them will be passed for the next three years. Mr Massey, if he should come into power, may not have the moral courage to repeal them. We scarcely think his political courage will rise to such a high level. At the same time, if Sir Joseph Ward should remain in or regain power, it is reassuring and satisfactory to reflect that he no longer possesses the majority to enable him to even attempt oppressive legislation of this character. We are going to have a period of political stagnation all right, and, though some people may deplore the fact, the majority of us realise that there is a period in every country when political stagnation, is desirable. In France, many years ago, political stagnation instead of the Revolution would have saved a lot of bloodshed.

It is possible that the session may end in the supremacy of neither side, and that an appeal to the country may become necessary to decide which party shall govern, but even then the situation is not likely to change materially. The people have become so heartily sick and tired of aggressive trades unionism that it will not give Sir Joseph Ward the majority necessary to continue the policy of fomenting industrial strife. This is the feeling of the best class of trades unionists which . includes all that superior section of workers who would do well whether there were Arbitration awards or not, and who have, for a long time, been conscious that their wages, as more highly skilled workmen, would be greater if there were no awards at all. The awards, as they know, have only served the purpose of bringing them down to the level of the inferior workmen.

On the other hand, a large section of the country is alarmed at the intention of Mr Massey to give the freehold to Crown tenants, at the original value of their holdings, and the popular sentiment is so strong against this example of political corruption that, in the event of another general election, he is not likely to materially strengthen his party. These leaseholders made their bargain with the State. They were given the land at far less than its market value, and if they want to acquire the freehold they should be allowed to do so only by public competition, so that the State, which is the whole of the people, should get the full value of the land and not be robbed. Of course, these tenants have made improvements. Well, let them be compensated for their improvements. At the same time, they are no more entitled to the freehold than the man who was unsuccessful at the ballot, and any attempt to give it to them is pretty sure to arouse a storm of . public opinion sufficient to drive any party out of power: