OUR SYDNEY LETTER.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2530, 27 September 1888, Page 3

OUR SYDNEY LETTER.

(from OUR OWN- COKRKSPONDKNT.) Sydney, September 12. The stagnation which has so long prevailed in politics lias been relieved somewhat by the Redfern election. Redfern is one of the most important of the metropolitan boroughs, and among other advantages enjoys that of being represented by a Cabinet Minister. The result of the election, however, has been the return, in the person of Mr Howe, of a gentleman, who, as an avowed Protectionist, is, of course, diametrically opposed to the traditional policy of the Government. It goes without saying that the journalistic organs of both sides are doing their very best, the one to magnify, and the other to minimise the significance of the event. From one section there is a frantic whoop of' exultation. The Star has almost twinkled itself out of its place in the firmament in the exuberance of its triumph. It boldly urges the party of Protection to move a vote of want of confidence as soon as Parliament meets, and it is evidently under the impression that Freetrade is dead, and is only walking about to save funeral expenses. There is an old proverb which says, "One swallow doesn't make a summer," but it would be cruel to (lash the unwonted cup of joy from its lips, or to destroy the easily-raised elation of its juvenile enthusiasm. I might suggest, however, that if a trial of strength is desired, there is no need to wait for the next session of Parliament. Mr Brunker, the newly-appointed Minister for Lands, is seeking re-election at East Maitland. Let the Protectionists test their suddenly gained strength by contesting his return. The Free Trade journals contend that the election has no political significance, except so far as it denotes widespread dissatisfaction with the Government. Thousands of voters, who, of course, are all claimed as Freetraders, did not take the trouble to vote. Mr Howe is personally very popular. He was in the field early, his supporters were well organised, and worked with a will, and they reaped the reward which commonly falls to the pushing and energetic. Mr Martin, his antagonist, only turned up at the last moment, apparently as an after thought. He is not a local man, has no widespread political influence, and those who voted for him did so mainly on abstract grounds, which have no power to move the masses. After giving the fullest weight to considerations of this kind, it seems to me that, like many other explanations, they only remove the cause one stage further back. If there was not enthusiasm among the Freetraders, why was it absent? Have they not a single popular and influential candidate to bring forward on an occasion of this kind ? There would doubtless have been plenty to choose from, had they entertained any well grounded . hope of being returned. For my own part I believe in Freetrade as I believe in peace. But I cannot disguise from myself that the public good is a consideration of far more importance than fidelity to any fiscal dogma, no matter how deep-rooted or time honoured.

Mr Dibb's action against the Daily Telegraph terminated very satisfactorily for both parties. Mr Dibbs got a nominal verdict of £100 in place 'jf the substantial sum of £25,000, at which he had assessed the damage done to his reputation. The paper is also cast in costs, which cannot amount to much less than £5000. It is stated that the jury, who were locked up all night, had entirely failed to agree, and that the verdict which they returned was a compromise between one scctiou, which wished to give Mr Dibbs substantial damages, and another which wished to find an unequivocal verdict for the the defendants. Of course, it is of far greater importance to the general welfare that a Treasurer sball furnish to Parliament an accurate statement of the finances of the country than that a newspaper shall confine its comments within the limits of strict propriety. So long, however, as the state of the law offers immense prices to the legal profession if they can succeed in making a man an offender for a word, his view is apt to be lost sight of. The Telegraph has since published two outspoken articles ou the case, in one of which it styles Mr Dibbs "The man of the 10th of December," which was promptly replied to by another writ from the irate ex-Treasurer, this time for £10,000. Public feeling in the case just ended was very much in favour of the Telegraph, which has received, I am told, many expressions of sympathy, and offers of pecuniary assistance. The latter have been declined, the proprietors being content, it is reported, to maintain the principles from which they have acted at their own expense. The ease at present may be stated in the manner familiar to a schoolboy as a proportion sum : —As £100 to £5,000 so is the estimate of the jury to that which was made by Mr Dibbs. Surely an extreasurer should, of all men, ba more accurate in hi 3 fore casts. This is a deficit whtdKs quite worthy to take its place beside previous achievements in that time. However, what Mr Dibbs lacks in exactness, he is evidently bent on making up with perseverence and the result of his next action may tell a different tale. The year is drawing to a close, and if the Government have any intention of setting the finances on a proper basis, and providing for the expenditure of 1889, before the money is actually disbursed, there is no time to lose. This is the most necessary, because it is allowed on all hands, that our expenditure is immensely overgrown, and the constant tendency, under a regime of monthly supply bills, or of estimates passed in a hurry in the small hours of the morning, is towards an increase. Unfortunately retrenchment is regarded by politicians rather as a subject to be talked about than as one which must at all hazards be carried into effect. Everyone i 3 willing enough to retrench the expenditure that is desired by his neighbours, but of the wants of jiiajown electorate or his own jn'Qtegea

he will not bate a jot. Hence instead of combination to secure economy we have combination for purposes of logrolling, and we go down hill further and further every session. Great things are hoped from the Local Government Bill, but so far it has hung fire sadly. The Newcastle strike continues to paralyse many departments of industry and to stimulate others to unwonted activity. The widespread distress and loss which are being caused are directing attention to the relations of capital and labour, and many thinkers are endeavouring to devise means for preventing similar calamities in the future. One of the most hopeful of the devices which have been conceivtd by the emancipated intelligence of the 19th century is that of a partnership of industry. The main principles are concisely stated in a pamphlet, which has been forwarded to me by Mr H. Bell, of Melbourne. It is simply a wholesome utilitarian principle applied to industry. These partnerships are based on a principle from which all new civilisation has sprung—a principle of intelligent selfishness. Self-interest, which seeks its end through a liberal consideration of the interests of others, pays far better than the savage covetousness which impatiently picks the bones of labour. Good sense now perceives that a thousand workmen will produce far more profit, if they have an interest in what they are doing, and have a motive to avoid waste of material, loss of time, and to work with all their sinfulness. The workmen who can be induced to work in this way create in a year a great additional sum of money for their employer; and if the employer divides this new profit with his men he benefits tho men as they were never benefitted before ; and employers obtain half the new profit thus created as an additional bonus for themselves, as a reward for their trust in the men, and for their own sagacity and good sense." As for the manner iu which an industrial partnership may be effected, it is given in the following words :—" I have only to fix upon that percentage of profit which pays me to carry on my business, and to say to my men I expect and require to make 10 per cent, (or 20 per cent, as the risk may be) such is now my average paying profit and for the future all we make over this by your co operation, goodwill, prudence, care and I will add to your wage?." Briefly, it is designed to lemove the antagonism which causes masters and men to regard one another as enemies, esch_ grudging the money or the service that is paid to the other, and to substitute for it a firm alliance. There is the more hope for the new principle because under the present system the relations of capital and libour are so strained as to have become wellnigh intolerable. ______