NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1530, 28 August 1912, Page 6

NOTES OF THE DAY.

The statement by Mn. Taft in defence of the Panama Canal Bill, cabled to us yesterday, is as shocking in its cynical sophistry as it will seem bold and patriotic to the spread-eagle section in America. The whole question at issue, he says, is this: "Has the United States, by tho Hay-Pauncefote Treaty, deprived itself of the right to pass its own commerce free through the canal, or remit tolls collected for the use of the canal 1" He replies "No," arguing that the rules specified in tho Treaty were never intended to restrict the United States in its sovereign powers over the canal. The British protest, he says, leads to the conclusion that after constructing, maintaining, and defending the canal, America shall have no right, to deal with its commerce in its own way, and this conclusion, he says, is "absurd." Of course Mr. Taft is bore repeating his previously expressed view, given in a message to Congress in December last, when ho said:- "We own the canal. It is our money that built it. We have the right to charge tolls for its use. I am very confident that the United States has the power to relievo from payment of tolls any part of. our shipping that Congress deems wise." Tho tone of Mn. Taft's latest statement is so demagogic that one can feel sure he is speaking less as a constitutional President' than as a Presidential candidate worried by a jingoistic rival. This is not quite the good time for a Presidential candidate to come out as an advocato of honesty on tho part of America. Me. Taft has to keep an oye on the strong anti-British section of American opinion. But Britain, if it moves sedately in foreign affairs, moves surely, and the Panama Canal Bill is many chapters short of the last word in the government of "the big cut."

Some searching comments upon modern primary education in Britain—which is near enough to primary education in New Zealand—are made by Dr. Rouse, of tho Perse School, Cambridge, in a recent letter to tho London Times Educational He thinks the industrial unrest in Britain is very largely due to a false plan of education. The country children arc safe enough: their lives and their environment educate them; but in the towns a large class is growing up, which has good sense and feeling, but no understanding, "so that it is gulled by the most transparent tricks and easily roused to passion by catchwords." "This," he says, "istho result of an,elementary education which has no relation to life, but only superimposed reading and writing upon growing organisms which it did not understand. The people's faculties aro cramped, distorted, or deadened; their lives ueing taken up with doing one thing each; and they have no ideals." What men call "education" may easily bo a curse, despite the apparent agreement of everybody to regard any sort of education as better than nothing. Dr. Rouse takes an extreme view of the importance of education in the programme of statesmanship. Upon tho education of English children, he says, defends the future of England, and, therefore, _of the world; and unless the question is lifted to the front rank by the Government, "sooner or later, brute force will decide our home problems, and our honourable place in the world will be gone." This is, we think, to attach too much importance to education. If England "reels back into the beast," it will be because of the politicians and the newspapers who, believing that ends always justify means,' encourage the ignorant to root up everything that stands in the way of immediate and drastic social and industrial change. The discussion in the House of Representatives yesterday on the Imprest Supply Bill was of interest if only for the little exchange of views it led up to.between the Minister of Finance, Mr. Myers and Sir Joseph Ward. Mr. Allen, as usual, was very outspoken and his condemnation of the methods of his predecessors in committing the' country to'expenditure before receiving the authorisation of Parliament will no doubt be generally approved. The really interesting part of his reference to Public Works expenditure, however, was in respect of the intentions of the Government regarding borrowing. The million and threequarters loan which it is proposed to raise this year, he explained, was rather, larger than it would otherwise have been because of the commitments which the Reform Govcrnmijuli bus taken over ns n legacy from its predecessors. It was lioned. he

paid, that this loan would provide for expenditure up to March HI oi next year. The idea of a million and three-quarters loan being sufiicient to cover tliis period appeared to rather stagger one ex-Minister of Finance, Mr,. A. M. Myehs, who asked if Mn. Allen meant to say that this loan would enable the Government to carry on for two years. Mil. Allen probably staggered others as well as the member for Auckland East still more when he stated that he hoped the loan would be sufficient to carry on with until December 31 of next year and that then there would be a sufficient balance in the general fund to carry on up to_March 31 following. It is gratifying to sec the Minister taking up a strong stand on the question of borrowing for public works expenditure. There is a certain amount of developmental work to be carried on for which borrowing is absolutely necessary, but it is not necessary, nor is it even defensible, that the country should go on spending huge sums of money annually in costly buildings where less pretentious structures would meet all requirements. The Dominion is studded with needlessly large or ornate post offices, railway stations, and other public buildings which are monuments to the extravagance of the Continuous Ministry. Public works expenditure can be cut down in certain directions without interfering with the proper development of the oountry or hindering its progress in any way. Borrowing cannot be stopped at once, but the tapering-off process can be commenced and the public, we have no doubt, will be gratified to note, that in this respect, as in others, the llcform Government is making it clear that it intends to live up to its professions.