The Week in Review.

New Zealand Graphic, Volume XLIV, Issue 22, 1 June 1910, Page 1

The Week in Review.

NOTICE. The Editor will be pleased to receive for consideration Short Stories and Descriptive Articles, illustrated With photos, or suggestions from contributors. Bright, terse contributions are wanted dealing with Dominion life and questions. Unless stamps are sent, the Editor Cannot guarantee the return of unsuitable MSS. The Wily Celestial. THE Anti-opium League cannot be too highly commended for their action in drawing the attention of the Minister for Customs to the fact that the Chinese have discovered a process by which tincture of opium can be converted into smoking opium. The why Celestial does not sufficiently appreciate the majesty of British law, and it is io be regretted that Mr Fowlds, by his reply, should have in any way chilled the ardour of those who sought to support and vindicate it. The Eastern mind seems quite unable to grasp the root principle of English law and liberty—■ that if a large number of people want to do a thing they must be prevented doing it. At the beginning of last century the Chinese wanted to stop the importation of opium into their country, and issued three edicts against it. They showed they were in earnest by confiscating all the opium imported, and de stroying £3,000,000 worth. One Chinaman, who was caught with some of the drug in his possession, was promptly cxe Suted on the spot where he was captured. J* d* A Ludaeu Principle* Naturally enough, when we found that they really didn't want the stuff we insisted on their taking it. We sent fourteen men-of-war and a large land force to see that they did take it, and we made them pay us six million pounds for

our trouble and open their five chief ports to the trade. In Singapore to-day we force them to admit it at the cannon’s mouth. But when John eays that he wants opium, we are quite justified in saying that he shan't have it. The principle is so clear and so luminous, and, withal, so logical, that a child could grasp it. If the Chinese were to close their country against us it would be very wrong and very wicked, and when they tried to do so we blew their forts to atoms and sacked their towns. But it is only an aet of righteousness that we should close our country against them. The worst of it is that the thick-witted Oriental can’t see it, and when he gets a fleet and an army of his own he may take to blowing up our forts and sacking our towns. J» J» English Maxim. We sadly need new missonaries to expound our creed to the coloured races. It is very wrong to gamble at pak-a-poo, but it is not at all wrong to gamble on the totalisator. The thing is obvious. Again, when we speak and preach about the brotherhood of man, it should be plain to the meanest intelligence that we don’t include Chinkies or Baboos or Germans or Froggies. We mean Englishmen of the labouring classes—if we mean anything. We don’t include employers or capitalists or anyone earning more than a fiver a week. They are like the English peers —pests of society. It is very curious how slow the Eastern mind is to grasp the most elementary facts of morality. We make a big revenue by importing opium into China, and we make a big revenue by fining the Chinaman in New Zealand for smoking it. We produce much profit from the totalisator, and we add to our gains by pak-a-poo fines. It is out proud boast that we have become a great nation by practising the maxims of the Gospel, and it was unkind and stupid on the part of a Chinese writer to suggest that we owed still more to those other Maxims which fire 300 rounds a minute. JI JI Child Reformers. At its last meeting the Auckland Jloard of Education discussed the im-

portant matter of instructing the children in a knowledge of the evils of gambling and smoking. The Chairman pointed out that we did not merely want the children instructed, but we wanted to reach the parents also, urging that, the gambling of the parents was a continual bad example to the children. Another speaker expressed the hope that sharebroking — “the worst form of gambling”—and land gambling would also be denounced. He was afraid that racing might be attacked to the exclusion of the stock exchange and the land market. There can be no doubt that parents as a class are more addicted to smoking and to these last two forms of speculation than are children, and the Anti-Gambling and Anti-Smoking League may be able to reach the parents through the children. This is a consummation devoutly to be wished. The boys could be encouraged to smash up father’s pipes and throw his stock of cigars and tobacco into the fire. The girls could cover his tobacco pouch with art linen, and convert it into a tasteful receptacle for buttons, tapes, and other odds and ends. They could also work cushions with nice mottoes on them, such as “Shareibroking is a sin,” “Never gamble in land,” “Tobacco is poison.” It would be a thoughtful act if the children encouraged papa in the path of virtue l»y offering him a prize of a nice mug with flowers on it, and an inscription, “For a good father,” on condition that he abstained from smoking and gambling for twelve months. Jt Jl We Know You Can Never Be Like Vs. But we hope the Auckland Board of Education will not be the only Board to embark on this much-needed crusade. Boards of Education are the most suitable public bodies to take charge of the matter, for they all have clean hsfn-ls as regards both smoking and gambling. We do not remember ever having heard of a single member of these Boards being even remotely connected with eharebroking or land transactions in any form whatever, while the members one and all view tobacco with abhorrence. They can therefore insist without any semblance of hypocrisy on all teachers educating the children to follow as far as possible in their footsteps. The members of the Board could visit each school in turn, and after short addresses they could sing in unison, "Though we know you can never be like ns, be as like us as you’re able to be.” The old way of inculcating morality was by teaching the children to keep themselves in soberness, temperance, and chastity because their bodies were temples of the Holy Ghost, and to -be true and just in. all their dealings, because Christ taught that it profited a man nothing if he gained the whole world and lost his own soul. It is very gratifying to observe how enormously we have improved on these antiquated methods. J» Jt Crown Defenders. Dr. Findlay's statement that he is considering the advisability of introducing in New Zealand a system of Crown defenders shows that lie is fully alive to the injustice of our present method of conducting criminal cases. Theoretically a prisoner is deemed innocent until lie

is found guilty: practically he is deemed guilty until he has proved himself innocent. An illiterate man without fundn has little or no chance of proving his innocence. He Is pitted against a clever lawyer skilled in the art of presenting evidence and an adept, at cross-examin-ation. Trained det«*ctives work up the case against him and all the expenses of a prosecution are borne by the State. A man in the dock is at a disadvantage from the start. He has little or no •knowledge of legal procedure or the rules that govern the giving of evidence. He often experiences considerable difficulty in inducing witnesses to attend to give evidence on his behalf. Cases are not rare of innocent men having been convicted when defended by experienced counsel; ten times as many must have occurred when the prisoner was without means and without legal advice. Wlien tlie Innocent Suffer. •But this is not the only injustice. An accused man may be the victim of an egregious blunder on the part of the police Or private individuals. His innocence may be proved up to the hilt, and the jury may acquit him without leaving the box. Yet he has no redress, and lie has to bear the whole cost of his defence. Not so very long ago a young fellow was accused of a serious offence against a girl. He was a working lad without means and without education. Fortunately, however, for him bis employer stood by him and retained counsel on his behalf. The girl and her mother gave their evidence in a most convincing manner. but under cross-examination the girl broke down and liopeles.-ly contradicted herself whilst the mother admitted that the charge had boon trumped up for purposes of revenge. The magistrate dismissed the case with scathing comments on the conduct of the mother. Yet even for the magisterial inquiry the costs of the defence amounted to over L* 29. whilst the other side had all their expense- paid by the Crown.* So that even if he escapes imprisonment an innocent man docs not escape a very heavy fine. The Press and Powelka. As showing that the public sympathise with Dr. Findlay’s scheme it is interesting to note that the Palmerston papers strongly supported the proposition that a subscription should be made in order to secure a lawyer to defend Powelka. The ’’Wanganui Herald” also advocated it, and in the course of an article or the matter said: “We sympathise with it, not for Powclka’s sake, nor with aarjr desire to elevate him to the position of a melodramatic hero, but because we believe that in all criminal cases accused persons should have the same chance as the Crown lias against them, i.e., an able counsel to appear in their behalf.** Powelka certainly did his best for the papers, and provided them with much exciting matter in a dull season. They oiight in their own interests to have spared no expense to save him from captivity. The “Manawatu Daily Times’* got so jubilant over the discovery that his name should be spelt Vawelka instead of Powelka. that it started on a regular orgy of spelling reform. It called him “Pnwekla** in its j°Y. and went on to speak of “Wellington,* “at upend uous,” “ret iceiw.” “roTst/*

Voreca,* “informat ioun,” and of “two characters who soliloquised at the top of their voices simultaneously.” The editor said that thanks to Powelka or Pawelka, or Pawekla copies of the paper fetched as much as 6d. apiece “in places like Dannevirke.” The staff evidently had a good time on those sixpences. J* Government House. Those who desire to see Government. House in Auckland converted into a* University, accuse those who wish to see the present building retained of “snobbishness.” It is not quite easy to see where the point of the accusation lies. The Governor stands as the representative of the King, and respect paid to the Governor is respect paid to the King. If loyalty to the Throne is snobbishness, then our memorial services, our public demonstrations of grief, our National Anthem are all snobbish. It is said that Government House exists for the sake of a clique. The same might be said, and with far more truth, of Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle. It seems passing strange that a time when we are loudest in our professions of loyalty to the Sovereign, we should propose to take away the residence of that Sovereign’s representative, and force him to take rooms at an hotel. Strangest of all is the contention that a University is democratic. Democracy has been defined as “counting heads, not Weighing them,*’ and it is the proud boast of democracy that in the ruling of a country the vote of the veriest bar loafer counts for just as much as the vote of the wisest man in the State. & J* A Menace to Democracy. The progressive legislation of which , We are so justly proud owes its existence to this fact. We want to see the 'principle applied to other things besides votes if we are to be a democracy in Anything more than name. In a truly democratic state all men should be equal, -and no man should be allowed to lord it over his fellows by reason of any fancied superiority, whether intellectual Or social. Now a University strikes at the root of this principle by giving titles Mjf B.A. and M.A., by means of which She posr-essors are enabled to assume an air of intellectual superiority over those who do not possess degrees. In a word, creates a caste and distinguishes between man and man. Jt io strange how fondly we cling to the illusions of the past. We admit that as regards the health of the state, the opinion of Bill fhnith, who can barely sign his name, is «very whit as valuable as the opinion of Professor Cranium, who has made a lifelong study of politics and political history. Yet when it is a case of our own health we still prefer the opinion of the expert, and do not allow Bill Smith to have a say in the matter. It is not ‘too much to say that this absurd prejudice is largely fostered by our University system.