NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1202, 10 August 1911, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

4 . One of_ the arguments used by the Ministerialist claqueurs against Mr. James Allen's very necessary criticism of the Government's dealings with the Chief Justice—an argument that they, are probably sorry now that they used—was that it was a grossly improper thing to attack a Judge who "could not defend himself." We showed quite clearly at tho time that a Judge enjoys a peculiarly favoured position in the matter of defending himself. Judges can and do defend themselves. It is only a few days, for instance, since Judge Higgins, of Australia, defended himself in a very long and strong statement. To clear up the point absolutely, let us quote- a passage that our Liberal friends cannot impugn. It is made by that clever Liberal, Mr. G. K. Chesterton, writing in that supremely Radical paper, the Xondon Daily News. Mn. Chesterton addresses himself to the fact that Mk. Winston Churchill, for criticising the Judiciary, was assailed by his political opponents chiefly because he was attacking Judges "when they were not there to defend themselves." Mr. Chesterton observed on this point (Daily News, Juno 24):

It is not c»'.en that o.ie gets two extremely comic ideas in one highly solemn remark. But this stupefying piecu oi' political humbug logically involves two ot the best jokes in the world. First it involves the suggestion that- the Commons nro so excruciatingly delicate and chivalrous that they never discuss anybody ex. cent themselves. President Kruger was specially provided with a seat in the House to answer all remarks by Sir. Chamberlain; Irish moonlighters 'were never mentioned it' they should have happened (for n few moments) 'to have left the House; Germany is never ivierred to save in the presence of the whole German Reichstag; and (whenever he is alluded to in a discussion on education l a Board School boy, starting to his feet, can always catch the Speaker's eye. The second, and even funnier, idea involved was the implication that our Judges arc a harried and frightened folk, who have no opportunity of talking about themselves, in plain point of law and fact, they are tho only J-hig-lislimen who can talk as long a"s they like, and say anything they choose. The Lords could (in theory) nil talk at once, and take no notice of Lord Lore-burn ;'■ the Commons could (in theory) move that Mr. Asquith bo no longer heard. But it' a Judge chose not merely to "defend himself ' but to tell long stories about his dog and his grandmother, to give an inexhaustible autobiography interspersed with comic and sentimental Eongs—if he did all this all the time, I know of no actual legal process by which ho could be stopped, except, perhaps, impeachment and decapitation

One need not go the whole way with Mr. Chesterton in orcley to appreciate the folly and insincerity of the argument that ho so entertainingly demolishes.

A very significant partial surrender on the land tenure issue was made on Monday by the Christchurch organ of the Ministry, which has led the opposition to what, with problematical honesty but with indubitable folly, it has called the "spoliation of posterity," "the dissipation of the national heritage" (etc.), involved in the demand of Crown tenants for the freehold. Hitherto it has been standing upon the principle of State ownership. On Monday, however, it admitted the case for the freehold in respect of 999-ycar leases, and admitted also that in elding so it was making a concession "against what Mr. Massey would call our 'sentiment.' " At the same time it urged that the demand for the freehold in the case of tenants on the re-newable-lease system must be "resisted at all costs." Any person of ordinary intelligence will sec that a publicist whoso cardinal doctrine is the essential wickedness of alienating State land has given away his whole case in admitting the propriety of alienation in respect of any particular class of Crown lessees. As the Christchurch Evening News observed, in a trenchant criticism of its contemporary's article, the Christchurch organ of the Ministry "is in the uncomfortable dilemma of a man who has surrendered a fundamental article of his religion": "He puts himself outside the pale of his own communion, and then finds that he lacks the courage to embrace an alternative faith. ' That certainly is the position of the Government. It has no religion in its heart. It has proposed many political religions. It is a Vicar of Bray. Jt is seeking tb keep in step with the Socialistic rump and with the freehold sentiment at the same time.

The full reports of the opening speeches of the candidates for the Christchurch North seat came to hand yesterday, and arc of interest as disclosing the attitude of Mn. Isitt and Mn. Hall on various political issues. Th-3 meetings of both were well attended. Mr. Hall's is reported as having been crowded, and Mn. Ism's as "well filled," hut as Mn. Isitt addressed two meetings in the one night this probably accounted for neither of his gatherings being so large as his opponent's, llcatling the speeches it is made very clear that while Mr. Hall may not be so skilled a platform speaker as his rival for the seat, he possesses a much wider and deeper knowledge of political affairs. His views are clearcut, and well supported with facts and figures; whereas Mn. Isitt, with the exception, perhaps, of the laud question, seems to have confined himself chiefly to generalities. This of course is not surprising. Mn. Ism is an excellent lecturer on Prohibition, but evidently knows nothing more than the average "man in the «.tvect""of political questions. He has been a little unfortunate at the out-

set in declaring against Government servants being permitted to exercise full political rights. At his meeting on Monday evening he found it desirable to change his views on this subject, naively explaining that "he had had some discussion on this matter''' and his previous objection to giving full political rights to Government employees had now been removed. This no doubt was a bad beginning, and rather shatters any hope of Mr. Isitt's supporters being able to put forward the claim that their candidate i is a man of strong and wellconsidered views. The contest seems likely to be conducted in an excellent spirit as between the two candidates.