TOPICS of the WEEK.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XX, Issue XXIII, 4 June 1898, Page 690

TOPICS of the WEEK.

A CHANCE FOR THE WOMEN REFORMERS. I QUESTION very much whether all . « the solemn circumstance of the law. added to what we should regard as its pains and penalties, will impress on the Northern Maoris now in Mount Eden the full enormity of their offence. As a fact, the Maoris have rather enjoyed the whole thing - up to the present, and unless the punishment meted out to them is exceptionally severe they will scarcely regret that they ‘levied war against Her Majesty.’ The gloomy walls of gaol have no great terrors for them apparently. Indeed some of them told Constable Beazley that they! liked Mount Eden, as they would get plenty of cakes and puddings there. One can fancy them singing in their cells IJovelace's well-known lines which that unhappy poet composed in prison— Stone walls do not a prison make Nor iron bars a cage; And it is not altogether improbable that if any one of them is let off with a. light sentence he will cherish no good feeling (towards the clement judge. For. after all. in Mount Eden they can feel like the righteous man that their bread and water is sure, supposing that they are reduced to the most rigorous prison fare, while in the North they would probably have lieen much worse off. In addition they have had a free excursion to the town, have found themselves an object of interest in the public eye, while they have the assurance that when they go back to Hokianga they

will, morally speaking, tower head and shoulders above ttheir fbllowts who played a less important part in the mimic rebellion or had no portion in it. Your savage nature, feeds on notoriety just as voraciously us your

modern ‘lion,’ and when his capacious physical appetite is ministered to as well with eakes and pudding he is supremely happy. In view of the obvious difficulty of dealing with these dusky transgressors so as to make them more respectful to the law in future it would perhaps be well to try a slightly different treatment from that followed with European malefactors. What would the authorities say to giving the Women’s National Council a chance to test their theories in this matter? Mrs Daldy said only the other evening that since she had returned from the meeting of the Council she was more than ever persuaded that woman is equally as fitted to reform society as man, if not more so, and she commended to the careful attention of the ladies the paper read before the Convention on ‘Criminals.’ It might not do to entrust the European prisoners to the methods of Mrs Daldy’s friends, but what objection can be urged against them making their experiments in eorpore Maori and reporting on the effect. I commend this suggestion in all seriousness to the ladies themselves. Let them induce the Government to hand over to their tender mercies these recalcitrant Maoris. Give the members of the Council a perfectly free hand in the matter, to make or to mar —or, indeed to marry if they please—'these inconvenient aboriginals. Eet the latter be given up without any reservation whatsoever, and let there be no stipulation as to the method or time of reform. Only let the ladies tell us when they are ready, ami we shall be pleased to inspect results. THE RESURRECTIONISTS. THE agitation got up by certain Irishmen to celebrate with much hullaballoo the centenary of the revolution of 1798, was taken up in anything but an enthusiastic spirit by their compatriots in this part of the world. And quite right, too. It was altogether an insane idea to endeavour to revive the memory of ancient wrongs, the why and the wherefore of which is a forgotten tale. Not patriotism, but an unforgiving and malicious spirit foreign to the generous nature of Irishmen, prompted it; and I am glad that, the ugly scheme has as yet come to nought or next, to nought. In New Zealand no one seemingly has troubled his head about the matter —a tribute to the good common sense of the colonists—while the most remarkable occurrence in connection with the celebration throughout the length and breadth of Australasia has been the resurrecting of two bodies from one grave to deposit them in another. The corpses were those of Michael Dwyer, who was one of the. leaders in the rebellion, and his wife. Dwyer died in Sydney some 73 years ago, and his wife followed 35 years later. The leaders of the celebration movement in Sydney, searching about for some circumstance that would give an interest and character to a function which they must have felt was terribly lacking in anything of the kind, hit upon this somewhat gruesome device. So far as I know, there was no special reason why the poor clay should have been disturbed except that theatrical properties were needed for the occasion, and a barbaric instinct suggested the exhuming of the long-dead couple. I cannot but regard the whole thing as a mere piece of clap-trap and nothing else —a disreputable bid for the support of the lovers of sensationalism. Of course, the people flocked to witness such an unusual occurrence, but because there was a big crowd do you suppose that it represented the sympathy felt in the celebration business? The promoters of the ghastly show may say so, but we know better. It was not sympathy, but curiosity, that attracted the people. If one were inclined, how easy would it be to ridicule the whole thing. Not being so inclined, I would merely remark on another aspect of it, how typical is this gruesome resurrection business of the whole movement. The feelings these agitators have been striving to awaken in the breasts of colonial Irishmen are as dead as those corpses. Dig them up from the oblivion into which they have, so mereifull.v disappeared, flaunt them in the eyes of men as if they - were the relics of saints, orate over them and build monuments to them—all is of no avail; they are matters of no moment to living men. If

the leaders of the celebration thought to kindle the wild Hibernian rage and hate by such means, they have made a big miscalculation. The fact that the body of the woman was in a remarkable state of preservation—her features were perfectly recognisable—has been commented on with an evident amount of satisfaction. It would almost seem that the agitators regarded it as a good omen, or at least symbolical of the condition of the state of the cause itself. If they did, it. only - proves how very weak the cause is. A NON-PAYING GAME. MR REID, the Premier of New South Wales, declared the other day that the pursuit of politics was disastrous to financial solvency. As this remark was delivered at a banquet. we may be permitted to accept it with a little allowance for the jocularity that is common on such occasions. Yet the fact remains that both here and in Australia we have had such a surprising number of needy politicians as to make one doubt whether there may not be some truth in what Mr Reid said across the walnuts and the wine. If we are to accept the testimony of politicians themselves, there is no question about the matter. I do not remember ever having met a member of Parliament who did not say that it was at great personal inconvenience to himself and financial loss that, he continued to serve his constituency. Even men who before they- got into the House were on their uppers would convince you, if you will only - permit them, that their entrance into politics was

a piece of daring self-sacrifiee for which they cannot expect and do not wish to be compensated. Mr Seddon has recently - made a declaration on this subject which is "very much at variance with the popular theory that the post of Premier is a lucrative one in these colonies. In reply to the familiar accusation that he had made some forty or fifty thousand pounds while in office, he assures the colony that so far is that from the actual case that were he stripped of his present positions he would not be called upon to pay either income or land tax. ‘Further,’ he remarks, ‘to-day I am not so well off as the day - I took office.’ And if Mr Reid’s theory is correct, Mr Seddon may - congratulate himself on being so well off. If the pursuit, of politics leads to financial insolvency, it naturally follows that the more persistently you pursue public affairs—and certainly Mr Seddon has been most faithful to them for many a year—the more inevitable is it that you will end your days in the bankruptcy court if not as a dependent on the. charitable aid board. All things considered, politics is not here what is called a paying game. In America it is said that when a farmer gets into the legislature he always counts on paying off the mortgage on his farm in one term, while if he has the good luck to be returned several times he makes enough to keep him in comfort for the rest of his days. But that, alas! is not the way in Australasia. Either our politicians are too honest here or their constituents are too mean. Whichever it is, the result, is the same, and the most that the luckiest politician can reckon on is to make his bread and butter when in the House and trust to Providence when he is throw - n out.

THE MODERN MARTYRS. SO strong a resentment was felt throughout the U nted States at the action of France in allowing the Spanish Cape Verde fleet to coal at Martinique that a great league of American ladies pledged themselves not to purchase goods of French manufacture. This method of retaliation, however effective it may be, appears singularly prosaic alongside those examples of patriotic self-abne-gation on the part of the fair sex of which one reads in history. Have we not heard of grand dames sacrificing their flowing tresses —the chief glory of woman—to make ropes for their beleaguered fellow citizens, even if they did not, like La Pucelle, gird on their soft limbs the dread accoutrements of battle? But to go no further than a mere millinery sacrifice—which, if we are to believe them, our shopkeepers are constantly - making—one can call to mind many instances that quite eclipse the devotion of the American ladies. There was Isabella, daughter of Philip 11.. who vowed not. to change her linen until Ostend was taken. Unfortunately for the lady’s personal comfort, the besieged held out for three years. She had her reward, however, in addition to the sense of satisfaction which the capture of the town gave her, for straightway a new colour—resembling the discarded linen, and known as I’lsabeau—became the rage. To most of us it would certainly seem that the American ladies are making a cheap sacrifice in discarding the products of the French manufactories or the many strange inventions of the Parisian costumiers. Cannot Great Britain and America supply the fashionable dames of the United States with finery enough and to spare? But I confess I speak with but a very imperfect knowledge of what the fashionable feminine mind covets or to what extent the ladies of the United States are dependent on France for their fine feathers. Probably if I knew more of these things I would talk differently. I wonder whether this self-denying ordinance includes not merely - the rejection of all French-made goods, but the rejection of French fashions also. Are the ladies of the Four Hundred of New York to forswear the divine suggestions of the descendants of Worth? To be altogether consistent, they should, for their action, as I take it, is something more than a blow - directed against French commerce; it is a protest against the perfidy of the nation generally. As imitation is the sincerest flattery, to copy the French modes even in goods of American or British manufacture w - ould surely - be a great mistake. But I doubt whether the league’s patriotism will stand such a severe test. I would fear that, while the body as a whole might take a high stand, there would be very - many individual lapses. There would surely be weak sisters who in a moment of temptation would succumb to the fascination of the latest bonnet or cloak from Paris, and even if the American looms supplied nothing better than blanketing and sackcloth, one would be able to detect an alien and Gallic cut even in these simple materials. I scarcely think that French commerce will suffer so very - greatly by - this latest American move. WHAT IS COURAGE? PEOPLE speak of the courage displayed by the Spaniards in the battle of Manila, as if such a quality were not to be expected in such a quarter. Now - , as a fact, there is no virtue in the whole world so common as courage. All nations possess it, and while they may differ in point of physical endurance, discipline, and efficiency, the one thing which they all hold in common is this same courage. Lieutenant Churchill, in his most, interesting book, ‘The Story of the Malakand Field Force,’ just published. discusses the curious question of why a quality - that is so common should be accounted so precious. His explanation is as follows:—‘The courage of the soldier is not- really - contempt for physical evils and indifference to danger. It is a mdt’e or less successful attempt, to simulate those habits of mind. Most men aspire to be good actors in the play. There are a few who are so perfect that they do not seem to be actors at all. This is the ideal after which the rest are striving. It is the one very rarely at-; tnined. Three principal influences,’ he continues, ‘combine to assist men

in their attempts: preparation, vanity, and sentiment,’ After sketching the gradual preparation which most soldiers go through before they come into actual conflict with the foe—that moment so graphically described from the soldier’s point of view by Kipling, when The hugly bullets come peckin’ through the dust An’ no one wants to face 'em, but every beggar must. —Lieut. Churchill goes on to speak of the. second influence. At that awful moment when the soldier feels it may be his turn next, ‘vanity, the vice which promotes so many virtues, asserts itself. He looks at his comrades, and they at him. So far he has shown no sign of weakness. He thinks they are thinking him brave. The

dearly-longed-for reputation glitters before his eyes. He executes the orders he receives. But,’ concludes this writer, who is a soldier too, ‘the thing that carries a man through at the end is sentiment. Everyone clings to something which he thinks is high and noble, or that raises him above the rest of the world, in the hour of need. Perhaps he remembers that he is sprung from an ancient stock, and of a race that has always known how to die; or more probably it is something smaller and more intimate.—the regiment, whatever it is called —“The Gordons,” “The Buffs,” “The Queen’s” -—and so nursing- the name, only the unofficial name of an infantry battalion, after all, he accomplishes great things and maintains the honour and empire of the British people.’ And what is true of our soldiers is true of all soldiers, because vanity and sentiment are more or less the portion of all.

THE WOMAN-MAN AND THE MANWOMAN. THERE is one gross inconsistency in the attitude, of the progressive women in these days of which they themselves seem to- be quite oblivious. While they claim to have a "right to enter unquestioned into the sphere that has hitherto been regarded as especially man’s, they resent the least suggestion that man can with credit discharge the duties of their sphere. As a rule this inconsistency does not trouble the male animal very much; he has no desire to pose as versed in the inner mysteries of domestic economy. The ability to eat a good dinner is to him matter for much greater self-congratulation than the ability to make one. Occasionally, however, you do come across a man who prides himself on a knowledge of the culinary art and the management of a household. Such a gentleman it would seem is Mr Jamieson, of the Auckland Charitable Aid Board, w-ho eame into somewhat violent conflict with a female critic of the Board last week because the lady had called in question the domestic experience of that body. Our old friend Mrs Daldy had at a meeting of ladies some time previously spoken in a commisserating tone of the ignorance of the Board. Naturally the members felt hurt, and they took an early opportunity to ask an explanation from Mrs Daldy. This the lady freely gave, alleging that, her remark had reference only to the ignorance of the Board in regard to domestic matters. Otherwise she graciously left it to be inferred they might be paragons of wisdom. The explanation satisfied the wounded feelings of the Board as

a whole, but Mr Jamieson was not to Im? appeased. He declared that ‘he had had a large experience of housekeeping, and would make porridge and rice pudding with any woman present.’ This revelation of unsuspected l>owers, however, did not evoke any admiration, and I have since heard him referred to in anything but complimentary terms by ladies generally. There is a tendency to scout such pretensions, or if they are admitted to ridicule them. Now, mark the unfairness of this logic. Surely what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the

gander also. If women aspire to hold equality with men in all things manly on what grounds can they object to men emulating them in their particular sphere? I often ask myself the question, why should certain areas be fenced off for men only and certain others for women only? Why should the matter of sex decide everything? I for one am quite willing to set these barriers aside and let the question of mental and physical ability determine the position and work of all men and women. There may be some women who would make, smarter men of business and legislators than the real men ; and some men who would make more affectionate mothers of families than the real mothers. Why should not’each be allowed to do the work he or she. can do best? This is what the progressive ladies assert: but why do they deny in the case of the male sex the very thing they claim for their own?

no? enTrxrf' the Inaorprisoners To The mefhorfs of 777 r -SDaliiyS -fr/errefs 2

* Ta the a, ■ Joo. taJte me bacS~ 7?10u.n? . Too miieh The k~or«ro pu. !

Keedj V-JAcKe tarts

'"I Saj Serfdom.. haVe you. job "the price of a. pint" on JJwfullj iorry/Reid old man. but Jo? stone-broke like joursetf ,

Eferyone e7mgs to samefhing’iihteTi Jte -thinks is hiffh a.nS nrt/e .

The Fna.n-WoTna.vt "the Urman- m ot-n.