NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 900, 20 August 1910, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

It is very pleasing to record that so faithful a supporter of the Government* as the Lijttelton Times is at last protesting against the Government's conduct oi the.railways"in one important particular." Alter expressing its dubiousness respecting the propriety of charging certain items to capital instead of revenue, our contemporary.observes: It is scarcely a conclusive answer to the criticism of the Government's methods to say that New Zeahind pursues u safer policy in this respect than.other countries owning their own railways do, and we should like to see the Minister keeping his accounts in such a way that his profits would represent the sum on which the board of directors of a piivate concern in a similar position would be justified in distributing a dividend. . This is the first occasion, so far as we are aware, on which a Ministerialist journal of any consequence, or even of no consequence, for that matter, has ' entered a protest against the deliberately misleading book-keeping of the Railways De-' partinent. We say deliberately, because in former years the railway accounts were presented in the way asked for by the Lyttelton Times. When the larger papers on the Government side begin, to incline towards candour, the movement for reform-must really be making rapid, headway, , . " .

An interesting • light' is thrown upon the spirit of trades unionism by the comments .of the London Daily News? reported in yesterday's cable news, _ upon the , House of Lords' decision in the now famous "Osbokne case." When it was finally ordered that a union must not apply its ordinary funds or any special compulsory levy towards the 'furtherance of political objects, the Labour leaders hoped that the unionists would rush forward with voluntary contributions towards the payment of the approved members of the Independent Labour party. Now we arc told that "the most experienced trades union officials are convinceel that to expect voluntary contributions by the unions is useless." One union branch, for example, appealed for a voluntary levy, and only two members out of a hundred responded. No doubt opirjkms will differ as to the true .explanation of this remarkable

revelation. Most likely it will bo found in the fact that the rank and file,of the unionists place little faith in the Parliamentary delegates appointed to carry out the designs of the avowed Socialists in charge of the Labour machine. They are more concerned with the industrial conditions affecting them than with the hare-brained politics of the Independent Labour party. The facts mentioned by the News should go a long way towards turning the political "neutrals" against the payment of members, which the Socialists now rely upon for the furtherance of their designs.

Yesterday's cable message respecting the immigration gains of New South Wales'during 1909 must have made very unpalatable reading to those New Zealanders whose love of their- country has no alloy of sclfintsrest or. party affection. For, next to Great Britain, the largest contributor .to the Mother State's population was New Zealand. Until two years ago the drift was hitherwards, but last year our loss, and New. South Walcs's gain, amounted to ' 7825 persons. Mr. .Buchanan drew attention in the House the other day the very disturbing statistics relating' to the movement of population to and from New Zealand, and while every sensible person admits the importance of these statistics, there are some foolish members in the House, who, with a complete, disregard for facts, shut out the possibility of finding a remedy by persisting in saying that New Zealand is doing splendidly in this respect. It may be as well, therefore, to give the official figures here. In the year ,1908, according to the advance sheets of the Year Book for 1910, our gain by excess of arrivals over departures was the highest on record (14,261), although for the biennium 1908-9 it was less than in either of the two preceding bienniums. In 1909, however, there was a sudden, sharp change: The gain shrank to 4719, the lowest figure since 1900. For the first time the handsome-gain in the spring quarter had become a loss. The Gazette of May 5 brings the statistics up to March 31 last by giving the figures"for the first three months of this year. The gain in that quarter (577) was not much more than a third of the lowest previous gain for the quarter (1513 in 1907) since 1902. The figures for the financial years of the decade 1900-1 to 1909-10 are: Excess of arrivals. 1900-1 ..'.'. 3,749 1901.-2 4,533 1902-3 12,631 ■ 191)3-4 10,322 1901-5 10,942 190-i-G 9.250 1900-7 10.935 1907-8 7,765 1903-9 14,148 I!)09:i0 1,861 This astounding last line speaks for itself. It speaks of a want of confidence operating against the 'expenditure of fresh labour-employing capital, and of a want of confidence driving our citizens away.