Current Topics

New Zealand Tablet, 21 April 1910, Page 609

Current Topics

The Weather One night Samuel Pepys—of * diary fame—woke up amidst the rush and clatter of a great wind. And he said to his wife: ‘ I pray God I hear not the death of some great person, this wind is so high.’ Pepys gave voice to a superstition that is by no means dead, although, it is over 200 years since the famous diary-writer passed over to the majority. If there were anything in the aged superstition, the past few days would have coffined a percentage of our few remaining ‘ great persons.’ For the wind has been blowing furiously on and off till it slit its bellows. It has sent haystacks flying; wrecked countless fences; torn small shipping from their moorings; swept at full blast against a railway train near Clinton and brought it to a dead stop; blown in the end of a huge grain store; shifted a railway station out of position; lifted the roof of the people’s stand at Riccarton; and, worst of all, brought down the telegraph wires, virtually, shutting us off for nearly two days from all telegraphic news from anywhere north of Christchurch. « i - _ln April, 1903 —seven years ago almost to a daya similar visitation, only fiercer and of longer duration, passed over Europe and Australia. This particular blow raged for several weeks. It loft Sir Thomas Lipton’s Shamrock 111., like poor Tom Bowling, a ‘sheer hulk’ off Weymouth; it wrecked and foundered vessels in Marseilles harbor; and it played red havoc over the British Isles, but especially in Ireland, uprooting valuable park trees by thousands, flailing the forests, ripping jerry-built tenements into flying smithereens, and repeating most of the destructive antics associated with that epoch in Irish history, * the night of the big wind’ of 1839. Its feats recall a famous cyclone ‘ out West ’ in America, of which it was said that it turned a well inside out and a cellar upside down, moved a township line, changed the day of the week, blew a mortgage off a farm, and knocked the wind out of a stumping politician.’ Exlttthe Chinaman The last Chinaman working in the Rand mines left for home on the last day of February. There were over 51,000 Chinese workers at the mines when the work of sending them home again was undertaken. They have now gone; and Thus happily ends,’ says the Manchester Guardian ‘ the miserable experiment which sought to turn the “ white man s country ” for which a great war was fought into a field for exploitation by yellow labor, cheaply bought and working under servile conditions.’ There can now be no question that the introduction of indentured Chinese coolies to the slavery of the compounds constitutes a dark blot in British Colonial history. One of its first, and most easily foreseen, results was the spread of vice and crime on the Rand. In the year 1905 there were thirteen thousand five hundred and twenty-two convictions amongst a coolie population of slightly over fifty thousand, including twelve hundred for desertion and thirty for murder. * Nor has the withdrawal of the coolies reduced dividends, checked the inflow of capital, or brought about any of the grave economic disasters which were predicted if Chinese labor were not employed. Mr. Langerman, who presided over a recent meeting of the Johannesburg Chamber of Mines, declared that last year provided a ‘ record in production and dividend disbursement,’ and there was ‘no finding capital for new mines.’ He expressed the opinion that ‘ the confidence of investors in the industry was fully restored, and probably would become greater than ever before. Nor has the number of white workmen been reduced. ‘An extremely gratifying feature,’ said Mr. Langerman, ‘ was the increasing number of white workmen employed in the mines’—lß per cent, more than in 1908. Of course there was some shortage of native —there always is—but ‘it had not been so great as to affect the industry. ‘The opponents of Chinese labor have been justified at every point, and probably all parties in the Transvaal and South Africa are now glad that a system so unnecessary and so discreditable has come to the long-looked-for end. It is a happy consummation which reflects equal credit on the Liberal Government of 1906 and on the Transvaal Ministry, which, in the face of many difficulties steadily earned out a policy of withdrawal.’ 5 Echoes from the Divorce Commission The Royal Commission on Divorce—the main object of which, in the intention of its friends and promoters, is to make divorce cheap and easy for the poor— commenced

its sittings in London ; and although some of the statements submitted have been of rather an amazing character some interesting evidence has been given' and some notable suggestions made. One of the first points to be discussed was whether there should or should not be one law for the man and another for the woman, and even on this apparently plain question the ethical ideas of the judges appear to be very diverse. Mr. Justice Bargrave Deane, a Divorce Court judge, said: ‘I think that the distinction between the sexes in the Divorce Acts should be abolished. Ido not see why it is more immoral on the one side than the other. If one is unclean the other is, and each sex should have similar remedies for similar offences.’ Sir John Bigham, oil the other hand, the President of the Probate and Divorce Division, committed himself to the surprising dictum that misconduct on the part of a man had not anything like the same significance that misconduct on the part of a woman had.’ He thought a husband’s adultery was not a sufficient ground in itself for a divorce, because, the man as exposed to more temptation to be ‘ accidentally ’ unfaithful. * It is satisfactory to know that the President of the Divorce Division, who was the first witness, spoke out strongly against the newspapers which offend by their way of publishing accounts of divorce proceedings. Certain details, he was told, helped to sell the paper; those details he would have suppressed, by punishing their publication fay a procedure analogous to a contempt of court. This view was strongly supported by the next witness, Mr. Justice Bargrave Deane, who said that reading about immoiality led to immorality, just as reading about crime led some people to commit crime.’ He said emphatically: J should allow nothing to be published in the press except tne fact that the case is being tried, with the result. Everything else should be excluded, whether decent or othei wise, except to show who was in the wrong and who got relief.’ * Sir John Bigham, President of the Divorce Court, is less inclined than some of the members of the Commission to meet the desires of husbands and wives who wish to sever relationship. He frankly avowed his belief that the divorce law is harmful in so far as it makes light of the marriage tie. He held that opinion, he said, in the interest of the parties as well as in the interest of the state, Our divorce laws,’ observed the witness, ‘do not extend to Ireland Scotland has a satisfactory substitute for those of England— lamby no means sure that Ireland is not better off.’ And in connection with this last statement, the President of the Divorce Division—presumably the highest authority in all England— gave the following weighty testimony to the effect of the teaching of the Catholic Church:— ‘l may say that I think that religion has a very great effect in restraining applications for divorce. I say so because my experience shows me that members of the Roman Catholic Church seldom come before the court; and I attribute that fact to the great influence which their priesthood have over their congregations and to the respect which is inculcated in Roman Catholics for the marriage tie.’ . The Federal Elections The signal victory of the Labor Party in the Federal flections, though it has come as somewhat of a surprise to those outside Australia, was fairly confidently anticipated by the Labontes themselves. Mr. Andrew Fisher, leader of the Party and prospective Premier, speaking a fortnight before the election, estimated his probable majority 'as sixteen, and put down a majority of ten as his minimum His judgment was sufficiently accurate, the latest revised returns giving him an assured majority of thirteen. The factors to which the success of the Labor Party may be mainly attributed are: (1) The revolt of the country against the ‘ Fusion ’ of the Liberal and Conservative Parties led respectively by Mr. Deakin and Mr. Joseph Cook—an’ alii ance which is described by the Age as ‘ the most demoralising plot ever hatched against the rights and liberties of the people’; (2) the fact that the Labor. Party was the only party that had a clearly-defined national policy to place before the country; (3) the Party’s splendid organisation and the undoubted capacity of many of its leadersand (4), in a lesser degree, the resentment felt—rightlv or wrongly -by a section of the workers at the imprisonment of some of the leaders in the recent strike cases. * The programme of the coming Premier, like most Labor programmes, aims mainly at improving social conditions—using the phrase in its most comprehensive senseand bv comparison with the wild revolutionary talk indulged in by many of the Socialist extremists, may be considered quite moderate. The mam features of the Labor policy have been outlined by Mr. Fisher-himself in these words-

‘ Briefly put, the difference between the Fusion Party and the Labor Party is this: For defence, for railways, for immigration, and for development of the Northern Territory they want to borrow. We want to tax accumulated wealth. For,the surplus of expenditure not provided by the Customs on the present tariff or an approximate tariff, we desire to provide by a graduated land tax, with the exemption -of improvements and exemption of small holdings. Virtually all the fertile coastal land close to a river, or a railway, or a market, is locked up in comparatively few hands. There is not even enough land for our farmers’ sons, in the situation and at the price which will enable them to farm it profitably. The only way to unlock the land is to tax the great estates that are not being put to the most productive uses. Therefore, to tax the land, so that the poor settler will escape, and the rich proprietor will bear the burden, is to remove the greatest obstacle in the path of Australian progress. It opens the way at once for the tide of immigration. It puts every available , acre at the disposal of the men who will cultivate it. It covers the country with homes. It provides the country with defenders against the time of need. . . The borrowing policy of the Fusion Party is designed to evade a land tax and' make the people keep on paying through the Customs. That makes immigration on any large scale impossible. Immigration on a large scale means access to the land. The only land worth access is monopolised. Therefore, before you can get a full tide of the right kind of immigrants, you must tax the land so that monopoly becomes unprofitable.’ The old charge that the Australian Labor Party represents revolutionary and atheistic Socialism is now frankly abandoned even by the Party’s bitterest foes; and the later accusation, that Labor members will attempt a wild-cat-scheme of land nationalisation is also shown to be a bogey, since the nationalisation of land is impossible under the Constitution. The policy outlined by Mr. Fisherof developing and defending the Commonwealth without borrowing— may not be feasible, but at least there is nothing in it that portends disaster to the country. » The Catholic papers— of which, in Australia, devote a great deal of space to political matterson democratic grounds supported the Labor Party as against the h usionists; but there appears to have been no special issue in the election vitally affecting the interests of Catholics as such. ‘So far as Catholic electors'are concerned,’ says the Melbourne Tribune, ‘ there are nothing but national and political interests.to claim their attention at the present time. Not only are they absolutely free from any clerical dictation or advice in regard to politics generally, but there is nothing in this coming election which claims their attention as Catholics. . . Catholics will vote as Australian citizens, and whether they put the emphasis on the “Australian by rejecting the Financial Agreement, together vith its authors, is a matter they will decide much as other citizens decide.’ Where the sectarian issue has been raised it appears to have been raised on the Fusionist side and, as far as the results are yet available, it would appear that in all such cases the electors have shown their disapproval of sectarian tactics in very unmistakable fashion. For the Lang Division of Sydney, Mr. W. E. Johnson, a prominent Orangeman, who last election was returned by a majority of over . six thousand, is at the time of writing lead“f- on }y one hundred votes. Mr. Mauger (Manbyrnony) and Mr. Hume Cook (Bourke. Victoria), both of whom hoisted the yellow flag, have been both easily deSt q 6< U , wh 1 1l M f* William Wilks, member for Dallev (iN.S.W.), who rested Ins claim to support mainly on his sturdy Protestantism,’ has been bumped out by over 3000 votes. Doubtless ‘ there are others,’ of whom we will know when the full returns are to hand. In the meantime, it seems safe to say that the ‘ anti-Romo ’ candidate in the elections has been very hard hit. ‘ Parnellism and Crime * . ‘As regards the libel,’ said Mr. Gladstone, referring m a speech delivered just prior to the setting up of the Parnell . Commission, to the famous— or, rather, infamous— Tunes articles on ‘Parnellism and Crime,’ charges of the darkest and blackest character have been made, and the making of those charges has either been an act of incredible baseness or a public service.’ That the act was not a public service the sequel clearly demonstrated; and it has now transpired that a portion, at least, of the ‘incredible baseness is to be credited to no less a person than Sir Robert Anderson K.C.B. formerly Assistant Commissioner of Metropolitan Police in London, late head of the Criminal Investigation Department in England, and in the past the holder of many responsible' Government positions - The secret has leaked out through what the cable describes as a ‘ naive confession ’ unthinkingly made by the author himself in the course of an article contributed by him to the current Blackwood Magazine. The aim and tenor of those

celebrated articles will be-well remembered by most of our readers. There were signs of a marked reaction in England against the . cruel, _ repressive policy of the Tories towards Ireland ;■ Gladstone and Home Rule were becoming, popular; and it was then, in the spring of 1887, that the London Times, - wishing to strengthen the hands of the Tories, pub-; lished a series of articles which were written to prove that Parnell and his party were revolutionists, stained by crime, and banded together with the express design of overthrowing British authority. The articles were written in a spirit that was almost 'fiendish. ‘ They raked the whole country,’ says Mr. T. D. Sullivan, in his Recollections of Troubled Times in Irish Politics, ‘ for- incidents of. crime and outrage; they spiced, colored, and garnished them, and set them forth in the most sensational fashion. . . . The articles reeked with stories of murders, mannings, and other outrages, - and plainly charged the Irish political leaders with having not merely connived at these atrocities, but organised and paid for them,’ ' The climax was reached by the outrage-mongers when, on April 18, 1887, the Times published in fac-simile the forged letter in which Mr. Parnell was made to excuse himself to a correspondent’for having denounced the assassination of Lord Frederick Cavendish, and intimating that the murdered Mr. Burke got no more than his deserts.’ • ’ ■ ' * ■ - For the time the infamous conspiracy succeeded. Mr. Gladstone was attacked. Lord Salisbury, in the House of Lords, declared, ‘ You may go back ; to the beginning of British Government, you may go back from decade to decade, and from leader to leader, but you will never find a man who has accepted a position, in reference to an ally tainted with the strong presumption of conniving at assassination, which has been accepted by Mr. Gladstone at the present time.’ And on the evening of the day on which the Pigott fabrication was published in the Times a Perpetual Coercion Bill was passed by a majority of 116 votes. This was the beginning of the history of' what Justin McCarthy speaks of as ‘an exceptional system of legislation, which no man in his senses would have thought of applying to England or to Scotland, amid the most tumultuous conditions of political controversy.’ « The history and final result of the great Commission all the world knows. The famous letter was proved a forgery; Parnell was triumphantly acquitted; and the Times was mulcted in heavy damages. The wretched Pigott committed suicide just as the officers of the Law were about to r arrest him in Spain, whither he had fled. To such an extent, however, had the minds of; Parnell’s English accusers been influenced that even his vindication by the judges did not, for a time, suffice to stop their mouths. Speaking of the debate in Parliament that followed the judges’ report, Morley, in his Life of Gladstone, says: ‘ Everything that was found not to be proved against the Irishmen was assumed against them. Not proven was treated as„ only an evasive form of guilty. Though the three judges found that there was no evidence that the accused had done this thing or that, yet it was held legitimate to argue that evidence must exist—if only it could be found. The public were to nurse a sort of twilight conviction and keep up their minds in a limbo of beliefs that were substantial and —only the light was bad.’ Such, very briefly, is the story of the articles that did so much, at a critical time, to retard and block the progress of Home Rule. According to the latest cables, Sir Robert Anderson now says, by way of mitigation or defence: (1) That but for the typist’s accidental omission of the words “ month of May’ his confession as to authorship would have been restricted, as intended, to the Times articles of May, 1887; (2) that . these articles were based on newspaper reports; and (3) that his aim was to defeat the plot for a dynamite explosion in Westminster Abbey on the occasion of Queen Victoria’s jubilee. In the absence of fuller information, the defence appears flimsy and unconvincing. The May articles, though less sensational than some of those which had preceded them, were part of the same series; and any writer who took part in the series must take his share of the stigma attaching to the literary company he has chosen to associate himself with. It is satisfactory to. note that, under pressure from Mr. Redmond, Mr. Asquith has 1 promised facilities for discussing the disclosures on the vote on account of Sir Robert Anderson’s pension; and it may be taken for: granted that the Irish members will take very good'care that the whole question of Sir Robert Anderson’s connection with these notorious articles will be fully probed.