NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 920, 13 September 1910, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

Last night's English mail brought us two very striking and important contributions to the local controversy over the evils of political control of State railways. In its issue of July 30, the Spectator, commenting on the report of the Vice-Regal Commission on Irish Railways (which we discussed in an article last week), makes.exactly the same prediction as ourselves concerning the results to be expected of a Board which is' mainly elected, by the' Irish ratepayers and which can count on the Imperial Exchequer to make up its deficits. On the general question the Spectator remarks:

The two advantages which the advocates of State purchase iriost confidently l promise are efficiency and .economy.' As .regards the former, the argument seems to take very little count, of-, observed facts. Whatever elso.'Governments may be, they are seldom inventive.; The ordinary motives that stimulate inventioncompetition and personal .gain—if "■ not altogether wanting, are operative in. a very much smaller . degree than'in. pri-

vate enterprise's. , . . Tlie inventive subordinate ' finds that the judgment finally passed on his ingenious suggestion is often influenced by, considerations which have nothing to do; with the intrinsic merits, of his plan. A Minister has to calculate how: the suggestion will strike the popular fancy. ~.. . : Is the prospect any brighter as regards, economy? A priori probabilities', certainly point the other way. We,do not deny that Governments, : like private.'concerns,: wish to spend, no niore than is necessary, but, their: conception of - necessity contains an, element of which' the.'individual trader has no need; to . take notice.' It includes the view which their supporters' are likely 'to .form., of . any new proposal, and this may .be.-shaped by considerations with which, the "economy of tho change has nothing to do. By' an ' interesting coincidence . the Economist of the same date' prints*, from its .Vienna correspondent, an account of -the. State railways .'.in'' Servia, .which,- as repeatedly';stated, in the Economist, have heavy deficits every-year, ''though when, they were in private hands they paid big-divi-dends." An inquiry is to be. held shortly .on the advisability of a total 'reorganisation of the railways,, and amongst .the prominent .men asked to take ' part in 'the... inquiry . was Direotor-Generai,:Kestranck, of the. Prague' Iron Industry Company,/who declined on the ground that "only railway men, who have done practical : service for years. should be allowed to say a word in'this, question." Discussing the causes of .the deficit, Kestranck says:

•' "Political influence must be removed a long way from .the management of'the railways. If lines are built; because'the votes "of tho. districts that ; asK foi ■ them 'are : required, .How. can.' the interests of the entire body .be- respected?;^'The oiiioes of tho /high, railway functionariesare .. filled ;,with members -of'- Parliament; demanding', favours.'all- the.;year round." "Railways cannot.. be, managed by, ;Parliamont,"~._; is A. Director KESTEANCK's.conclusive opinion.

One of the topics in tho New-York press just now is the curse of "over- ' legislation" and it is a- topic ; _in which; New Zealand -has "a inferest. - The'New'-York Independent '■ declares that the State -'Legisla-tures'.-in ■ America "have-been led-to pile up a lot of restrictive statutes that if enforced would actuallymake life and work almost an impossibility." .The; Rural New Yorker :-.ha's chosen a very interesting method of illustrating this .point. ... It;gives a supposed extract from .the. diary of an innocent'farmer who in,a. single day involves himself in lawsuits that altogether, sum. up fines of 400 Idol-, lars. He is 'fined 15; dollars for building afire under -a- boiler that exceeded eight horse-power without a fireman's license, and 25 dollars for using a. boiler that ; lacked; a fusible plug. He was fined 25.' dollars - for dressing a calf 1 without a butcher's license, and another. 25 dollars for .doing this work _in his barn, which had not been/licensed' as a slaughterhouse. _•; He was fined 20 dollars for weighing the 'calf on scales ;that 'had notbeen.sealed: for' twelve Another' 25" dollars was.'exacted; : froin'hiih- for baiting his hors&'-pn- the- street without- :a police permit, and another 10 dollar's for turning his! team to the left.' For shooting ; at, a fox without -a hunter's license he 'was fined 10 'dollars, '. and '25 dollars for building a fire in the open air without a permit.- These are' only a few of; the troubles- which came upon him for doing exactly a's'.he had been doing every day for thirty-years. It is a little, amusing to find the American press complaining of these, trifling restraints upon personal liberty. If the American really wants; to know what.the law 'can do when it tries, he should come to New Zealand and get a taste.of' the Arbitration Act.■-.

The Leader of the Reform party, in the course of his speech at Palmerston North last evening, summed up extremely well, the position in relation to the Government's latest Land Bill. "Judging from what was contained, in the Bill," Me. Massey said, "it was his opinion that those who were, responsible for it. wero either utterly _ ignorant of the principles of political economy, or utterly ignorant or regardless of the principles of political rectitude. He was also of the • opinion that those; who were responsible for the Bill wore ignorant of what the country required in the way of land settlement. The country wanted idle and unoccupied land made available for settlers; it'wanted something to restore confidence, and encourage enterprise and.energy. The. present Bill did not \ go in those directions,' but exactly the reverse, and he thought that, if they could not do better in the way of Land Bills, members of the present Government had better be relegated to obscurity, which many of the people in the country thought they' deserved." Nothing that has occurred in recent times is more likely to discourage investment in New Zealand than the confiscatory provisions of this Land. Bill relating to the compulsory leasing of private, lands. Wc need not recapitulate the effects of these provisions in locking up the unfortunate land-owner's capital, and robbing him by penal taxation of a large part of the very small return paid him by way of rent for the seizure of his land. Even Government newspapers and the most Kadi-! cal members on the Government side of the House have condemned this portion of the Bill. What we would-' direct attention to on the present, i occasion. in the ittimenws amount of

harm that must bo done by_ the introduction of such legislative proposals in alarming people who nave money to invest in enterprises of various kinds in the Dominion. The proposals are not at all likely to. pass into law, but the harmful effect will remain, for the investor cannot be' blamed if he regards this Expropriation Bill as indicating the general attitude of the Government of the country towards any man who may develop large interests in New Zealand. There is always the doubt and uncertainty as to, what is coining next, A member of a deputation of employers engaged in the iron-working industry which waited on the Minister for Labour yester : day summed up the prevailing feel-, ing very we'll when he said: "Atpresent, the trend of affairs was to make an employer feel little less than a criminal; he did not got any credit for honest intentions. It is the drift in this direction that has retarded industrial enterprise, and the compulsory leasing clauses of the Land Bill just introduced will, as we have before stated, do more to accelerate that drift than any single legislative enactment on our Statute Book. ■•' : ''' ' ■■'■■'..:...