The Week in Review

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLI, Issue 3, 15 July 1908, Page 1

The Week in Review

r Quite a number of legislators, apparently, desire to re-open the question of the site of the capital of the Dominion. The appointment of a committee to report on the rebuilding of Parliament House has given these gentlemen an opportunity of airing their opinions. Auckland, Rotorua, Palmerston North, and Port Underwood have all had their advocates, and of course, there are members who think the ideal site for the seat of Government is somewhere on the Canterbury Plains, near the foothills of the Southern Alps. Those people ■who advocate the creation of a new legislative capital may be divided into two classes—those who are animated by jealousy of Wellington, and those who desire to commit the State to a costly and doubtful experiment in land nationalisation. With many, the pretext for Change is found in the liability of the present capital to be looted by an armed force landed from an enemy’s cruisers. The Hon. S. T. George advocated the placing of the capital far inland, so that Parliament would be safe from hostile invaders. But why this anxiety to safeguard Parliament? Do our sapient legislators fondly dream that they would be the principal objects of attack by possible enemies? Or, do they imagine that the enemy would want to seize the State archives and clean out the Treasury? There is no need for alarm on either of these grounds. Parliament would be the last thought of an invading force. Neither would such a force want to lay impious hands on the State blue books and vouchers; and, as for the Treasury, everybody knows that our Government does not keep vaults full of bullion and specie, and that a conquering invader would find no more in the Treasury than Mulai Hafid found on his recent visit - to Fez. The Moorish gentleman got a pile of old clothes; the conqueror of New -Zealand would get a bundle of old papers! No; there is positively no need to remove the capital; and it is a relief to find that the committee has not been instructed to go upon a wild goose chase for a new site. , & “O, come ye in peace here, or come ye in war ?” The question that was put to Young Lochinvar, of the well-known ballad, might well be put to the American Fleet by the Japanese; for though it is w’idely and officially announced that the voyage of our trans-Pacific cousins is one of an entirely peaceful nature, the suspicion exists that the cruise has its minatory aspect. This suspicion is strengthened when we find an American naval officer, turned politician, taking every opportunity of shouting a defiant insult at Japan, and endeavouring to incite his countrymen to war. Some eight weeks ago, when relations between America and Japan were somewhat strained, Capt. Hobson —who seems to be the American equivalent of England’s “Fighting Charlie”—declared that “only one thing remains before war, viz., a pretext”; and he added that “America must refuse to let a crisis arise until the battleship fleet reaches the Far East.” Now, after the fleet has sailed on its westward course to the East, Capt, Hobson has indulged in further inflammatory oratory, emphasised by expletives, and backed by an alleged statement made by President Roosevelt recently, to the effect that there was “now a greater possibility of a war with Japan.” J* J* Wild talk of this sort is only pernicious, in so far as it may represent the under-current of feeling and conviction among Americans. To us hero, the idea of such a war seems utterly pre-

posterous. And as to making a pretext to declare war when the fleet is within striking distance of Japan, such a course appears entirely foreign to American methods. Further, the fleet now on its way hither is quite unequal to the task of coping with that of Japan, if it attempted hostilities m Japanese waters, it would probably meet the same fate as. did the Russian Squadron. The notion of war must therefore be dismissed as the mere vapouring of a “Jingo” politician. The Japanese have evidently no thought of treating the Americans other than as honoured guests; but it is significant that their preparations for welcome include a naval display on a scale of magnitude that will make it an effective reply to any element of bombastic threat that may underlie the American visit. The ancient Romans said: “If you wish for peace, prepare for war.” It may, therefore, be assumed that the displays of force about to be made constitute a guarantee of peace; yet somehow, when one sees a man peel off his coat and “put up his props,” one does not get the impression that he is about to move a Peace Congress resolution. It may be different with nations, however. Let us hope it Is. <5» It would seem that the position in the Dominion to-day may be described in the words of Goldsmith, with the alteration of a single word—- “ Ill fares the land, to hastening ills a prey, Where wealth accumulates and men decay.” The Colonial Treasurer has just announced a “record” surplus of £767,849, the revenue continues redundant, business generally is good, despite the usual winter cry of the unemployed—a few scores of them, spread over the four chief cities; the deposits in the Post Office Savings Banks have increased during the year by about a million and aquarter sterling, and now stand at over £11,500,000; but in spite of all these gratifying facts, there is “a fly in the ointment” and perplexity in the minds of our statesmen. The trouble is the declining birth-rate and the cosequent falling off in the supply of young folks. The education statistics show a marked decrease in the number of children of certain ages who are in school attendance; our factories clamour in vain for juvenile workers, and the “boy wanted” advertisement of the city business man remains unanswered. The question is not “What shall we do with our boys?” It is rather —“How are we to keep up the supply of boys and girls?” A Labour organisation has suggested a "Government bonus for large families, and the Minister for Labour, to whom the resolution was submitted, has declared that the Government must soon “deal with the matter in a practical way.” He has obtained figures on the subject for his'annual report which, he says, will “simply stagger” the community. Our industries, he holds, must languish if we have not a natural increase of population. lie realised the value of gocd immigrants, but considered “it was a poor country that had to depend upon immigration.” And even immigration may fail us, for the departmental report shows that the number of immigrants who camo to this country last year was only 3104, as against 3712 for the preceding year. Jit But there are people who object to immigration. The Labourites do not like to have the market fully suplied, and other people think it wrong to induce farmers with capital to settle here. One of the

latter class of objectors, writing from Pohui, Hawke’s Bay, draws our attention to the fact that there recently arrived in Wellington several farmers who were “assisted” by the Government, despite the fact that they had each over £lOOO in capital, while one had, in addition, an income of £2OOO a year. We quote the correspondent’s letter: —

“I enclose a cutting from your issue of the 17th June, and should esteem it a favour if you would inform me if a mal ' with a capital of £2OOO, amt an income oi the same amount, Is considered by those in authority either a desirable import, or one for whom the worker of the Dominion ought to be called upoti to assist to enter the country? A man, with such a pecuniary standing, who is willing to pauperise himself to his future home, cannot, even by the most Ingenious imagination, be expected to benefit a new country to any appreciable extent. It surely cannot be that our country is in such a critical state that it is compelled to subsidise such capitalists.”

In reply to the question propounded in the opening sentence, we can only say that “those in authority” (assuming that they know the circumstances) evidently consider it right to assist rich men to come here. Possibly they have no choice; perhaps they were deceived; but the person with an income of £2OOO a year who accepts such aid might well be awarded the medal for hieanness. For the rest, it is absurd to suppose that this country would be benefitted by the importation of wealthy people. One good, sturdy, independent farmer is of more value.than a. dozen millionaires, but the farmer is none the worse for having a few hundreds of pounds wherewith to make a start. It is well to encourage the immigration of farmers, and no reasonable person would object to the State contributing towards their pasasgc money, so as to place this country in fair competition with Canada and the United States; but we should certainly draw the line at helping men with £2OOO a year. J* J* “Oh, my prophetic soul! My uncle!” It seems to be quite on the cards that, in this favoured Dominion, the State will ere long set up a monopoly in pawnbroking. There is now before Parliament a bill to amend the Pawnbrokers’ Charges Act, and in the course of the debate on its second reading, Mr Barclay, M.P., for South Dunedin, expressed himself in favour of a State pawnshop. In referring to this suggestion, the Hon. J. McGowan said" “it would be a step in the right direction,” but he thought the time was not yet ripe for such a proposal. Simultaneously with this, it is to be noted that there is a movement among certain legislators to acquire for the State a controlling interest in the Bank of New Zealand —the biggest pawnshop in the Dominion. It is no doubt quite in accord with the Government’s “cheap money” policy that it should control the rates of advances of all kinds, and it cannot do bette rthan begin with the pawnshops, which are the banks upon which the for poorer classes draw advances. The success of the Mont De Piete establishments in France can be quoted in support of the idea of Government pawnshops. At present, in this country, pawnbrokers can charge as high as 80 per cent per annum for small loans; the bill before the House proposes to restrict the rate to 25 per cent for loans under £2, and to 20 per cent for loans exceeding that amount. The French institutions go more than “one better' than this, for four of them lend money gratuitously, while the others, over forty in number, charge only from 4 to 12 per cent. In the case of thirteen of the establishments, the profits arc devoted to the support of hospitals. The business done is equal to two millions sterling per annum. Similar institutions exist in Germany. Holland, Brussels, and Italy—the latter country having originated them as early as 1440.. The State in New Zealand having assumed paternal relations to the people, why should it not also be the “uncle” of the impecunious? The objection may be urged that

the Dominion is dependent upon Uncle Bull for advances, and that she cannot always depend upon getting them cheap. If you go to your uncle to borrow some money, ’Tis right he should fork it out cheaply to you; But then, to supply you ( it really is funny), He must seek his avuncular relative too! There must of course be a limit to this sort of thing, for John Bull has not a rich uncle upon whom he can draw for advances. On the whole, it will be well if the efforts of our Government are directed towards obviating the necessity for pawnshops. Where these flourish, poverty is most in evidence. If we can keep that Wolf from our doors, there will be no need to advocate State pawnshops J* J* The example set by the municipality of Christchurch in the matter of theatre regulation should at once be followed by every similar body in the Dominion. The city fathers of the beautiful town on the Avon have decided that the seating accommodation of every theatre under their jurisdiction shall be fixed by bylaw, and that every ticket sold, be it for “toney” circle oj- for humble pit or gallery, shall bear a number corresponding with that of the seat, so that the sale of tickets must automatically close when the theatre. Is full, and every unit of the audience can be assured of a comfortable seat, according to the length of his purse. Why such a necessary reform was not insisted on by the theatre-going community long ere this is another instance of the long-suffering patience of that extremely good-humoured section of the community. But, since Christchurch has headed the advance, and since all other cities must inevitably follow in its wake, would it not be judicious and graceful if up-to-date managements at once recognised the position, and in addition to the compulsory numbering of every seat, granted patrons in any part of the theatre the privilege of reserving their seats? The extra expense involved would be small compared with tho enormous benefits bestowed. WitJi regard to the gallery, where large numbers would have to be handled by ushers, the time up to which seats would be reserved for holders of the tickets could bo fixed at a quarter oi an hour before the starting of the performance. The stalls could be, say, eight minutes, and the orchestra stalls and dress circle five minutes prior to the rise of the curtain. Once the performance had started, there should be no admission to any part of the auditorium whatsoever, until the first interval. This last rule, as was amply proved during the ill-fated opera season, would effectually cure the insolent ineonsiderateness and rudeness of those nuisances who persistently arrive after the opera or play has commenced, while the other advantages of registration of seats are too obvious to need mention. J* d* Certain it is, that many a pater familias who cannot afford to take four or five seats at 5/- or 7/6, and who objects to standing for hours in a crush, and therefore never goes to a popular entertainment under present conditions, would swell,the ranks of pleasure-seekers if he were allow'ed to reserve gallery seats at the usual prices. Another point, on which nearly every theatre in the Dominion needs urgent reform, is the -width between the seats, and, in somecases, the paucity of alley ways. The matter of mere comfort Is worth con side.ring, quite apart from the question of safety; but it is on the ground of safety that the present intolerable squeezing of scats needs instant attack. The theatre proprietors, if tackled on the point, immediately quote some more or less legendary time in which a full house

gill empty itself after a final curtain. Jf the seats are properly “turned up,” there is plenty of room, so they tell you. Exactly so—IF everyone turns up the seats and no accident occurs! There is much virtue, or the contrary, in an “if.” if we are in perfect health and the possessors of perfectly working digestions, we‘can sup off crayfish, cold roast pork, and bottled beer. But “if” ever so small a derangement takes place in our internals the results of such a meal are likely to prove disastrous. Likewise, our theatres can admittedly empty under normal conditions in a surprisingly short while. But just suppose a panic, even a moderate one. A shawl or an opera cloak would jam; a man would faint (more likely than a girl); then the seats in the stalls, orchestra stalls, or dress circle of most theatres in the Dominion would become a shambles where the life would be stamped out of the helpless. The scene does not bear thinking of. J* Then there is the matter of asbestos or iron fire-proof curtains. Until you force proprietors to supply these within a specified period, they will never be supplied—only talked about, and possibly promised. The attitude of theatrical managers is well shown in the report of a meeting held at Sydney, which denounced the Christchurch by-law as “arbitrary in the extreme.” The reply to this is that no regulation that seeks to. secure plain justice to theatre-goers, combined with safety and comfort, can be too arbitrary. Only the other day, Auckland had experiences proving the need for a regulation to safeguard the public against imposition. Scores of people who had paid for seats in the orchestral stalls were crowded out, and had to be content with seats in the ordinary stalls. Under a proper system, such as is to be introduced in Christchurch, no opportunity would arise for the spoliation of the publie in this fashion. If it is not “obtaining money under false pretences” to sell a thing which you are not in a position to dispose of, there is need for a new legal degnition. No doubt the practice in vogue is illegal, but people prefer to “grin and bear it” rather than create a disturbance or raise a lawsuit. The remedy lies with the owners of theaties, not only for this evil, but also for those of overcrowding, and danger in ease of fire or panic. If they do not voluntarily introduce these reforms, they will have to act under compulsion of law. It is to be hoped that the wealthy and public-spirited men who own the theatres and opera houses in our large cities will of their own volition take steps in the desired directions. d* J* Do dreams ever come true?—in other ■words, do events that “happen” in dreams ever occur afterwards in real life, in such a way that the occurrence can truly be said to be a fulfilment of the dream? Most people in this mat-ter-of-faet ago simply laugh at the idea, or when confronted with an instance that cannot be laughed away, take refuge in the theory of “coincidence.” .What matter, say they, though an occasional dream has something like a fulfilment? What of the thousands of dreams that never come true? That would be a very effective retort if it were contended that all dreams partake of the nature of warnings or previsions; but no one has ever made such a claim. In the words of Tom Hood—- “ Some dreams we have are nothing more than dreams — Unnatural, and full of contradictions; But others of our more romantic schemes Arc something else' than fictions.”

Thinking it possible that some of our readers might have had experiences of “dreams that come true,” we offered prizes for the best true narrative of a dream and its fulfilment. The result exceeded all expectation, for a large number of thCiderits, vouched for as facts, have been described by competitors, and some of the more striking will be found in another part of this issue. Those stories bear a close resemblance to others that have been told of dream experiences; but, being personally vouched for by writers, they must carry more conviction than the anonymous narratives often published. The dream stories sent in for the competition do not all deal with disasters. There is one that tells how the dreamer was led to back a winning horse; another is a very purposeless case of prevision in the matter

of shaving water. But the very triviality of this narrative argues the reality of prevision, since in such case no theory of foreboding or anxiety will satisfactorily aeount for the dream. Jt •.* What is the philosophical explanation of the phenomenon of prophetic dreams? The occultists tell us that Time is a mere illusion, and what we call Past, Present and Future are in reality the same. Hence, if human beings can rise superior to the conditions of this life, which are the cause of the illusion, they are able, in greater or lesser degree, to see occurrences long before they happen. It is an enlargement of vision analogous to that which one obtains on climbing a hill, only it results from an exaltation of spiritual state. This is the whole theory of prophecy. There are people to-day, called clairvoyants, who in their normal condition claim to be able to see what ordinary mortals call “the Future.” There are others who get this power of pre-vision when in a trance condition; others, again, are raised into the proper state when asleep. The dreams described by our competitors are, according to this theory, the dreams of people who in their sleep are capable of entering on a plane of existence in which they are unhampered by fleshly conditions: in which their minds are impressed directly, and they gain information of occurrences to come. In general, such dreamers can distinguish between dreams of foresight and those that are “nothing more than dreams.” The first prize narrative, published in this issue, gives an instance of a dream-warning that was heeded, possibly with the result that the dreamer’s life was saved. This incident) proves that dreams may have their uses, and arc not. such unsubstantial stuff as they are generally supposed to be. It also seems to show that people in a certain stage of intoxication may have the gift of peering into the future. A sporting story suggests that if the power of “picking winners” were generally developed, there would be an end of gambling on horse races, for everyone would be in the position of backing a “dead cert.” The gambling reformers anight do worse than look into this aspect of the question.