NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1619, 10 December 1912, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

When we • expressed the hope in our leading article on Monday that the discussion of the Bible-in-schools question would not be allowed to degenerate into a campaign of misrepresentation we hardly expected that we would be so promptly provided with such a clear example of what we meant as is contained in an article on the subject which appeared in our evening contemporary last night. It takes an isolated sentence from our article, entirely ignores the context, draws a series of wobbly deductions of its own,- and then triumphantly declares that "neither of these propositions will be maintained in this extreme form by any reasonable man." Probably not, but in view of the fact that "these propositions" are the creation of the I'ost's own perverse imagination, one is left wondering why our contemporary should go out of its way to confute itself. However, that is not our business, nor it is pur concern that the ' Post considers it "cant" to say that the people _o£. New Zealand can be trusted to give a fair and intelligent verdict if the Bible-in-schools proposals should be submitted to them in the form of a referendum. The Post concludes by stating that the Defence League contends that the Bible-in-schools programme involves the endowment of a particular form of religious teaching, and that this contention must not be brushed aside by stating that the people must decide. But the other side emphatically repudiates this contention, and are its demands to lie unceremoniously brushed aside with the assertion that the question is not a proper one to submit to the electors? For reasons which we stated in yesterday's issue, we are of the opinion that the final decision must be allowed to rest with the people themselves. Professor Mackenzie, who writes on the subject this morning, is much more logical than our evening contemporary. His contention that Parliament has had no mandate from the people on the subject of a referendum is perfectly true. It is true also, as he implies, that we have no knowledge at present that a majority of the people even desire a referendum. It is for those who are advocating the submission of the question at issue to a referendum to show that there is a sufficient force of public opinion behind them to warrant this step, and we believe that they are able to do this. The cost to Italy of her war with Turkey, according to English files which came to hand last evening, is comparatively _ slight when placed beside her gains through war. According to an interview with SIGNOR Tedesco, the Italian Minister of Finance, published in tho Finanza Italiana, the amounts placed at the' disposal of the Italian War Office ana Admiralty during the twelve months' campaign reached 458 million lire (18| millions sterling). A large part of this amount, however, was expended in replenishing stores and equipment, and probably the actual cost of the war, including tho capitalising of the annual payment of some £80,000 a year to Turkey on account of loss of revenue from Tripoli, will not exceed £18,000,000. This works out at less than £40,000 a day. The surprising feature, however. and one which has caused a gooa deal of comment, is the ease with which Italy has been able to bear the additional burden of the war. It was generally felt that she would be seriously crippled financially by the heavy drain on her resources. Some financial critics predicted that a very short campaign would expose weak spots , in _ her financial armour. Far from this being the case, she has not only carried on the campaign with success, but at its close tho Minister of Finance has been able to show a substantial credit balance of receipts over expenditure at the end of the year. Tho total receipts were nearly £125,000,000, and the expenditure, including the cost of the war, a little less than £117,000,000, leaving a credit of some £8,500,000. At the close of the war the funds at the disposal of the Treasury amounted to over £15,000,000. The Railway Department is waking up in the matter of attending to the public convenience, and incidentally to the business interests of the railways. It has just issued a booklet setting out in handy form the special train arrangements for tho coming holiday season. It is a small thing, no doubt, but it is one of those things, nevertheless, that counts for a good deal in smoothing the way of the public to an understanding of the placed at their disposal_ by _ the Department, which in turn means increased passenger traffic records. The booklet sets out all the special events likely to attract the attention of holiday-makers, .gives particulars of excursion concessions, special trains, and alterations and additions to the ordinary time-table, both for long-distance and suburban travellers. An effort has been made to show tho train arrangements in tho clearest possible manner, and the booklet should be very generally sought after. Mr. D. M'Laren, as a leading light in the United Labour party, on Sunday last, according to a report in the official organ of that party, formed one of a deputation which waited on the Tramways Employees' Union to urge it to affiliate with the United Labour Council. Mr. M'Laren next day, that is yesterday, as Mayor of the city, was waited on by a deputation from tho Trades Council on behalf of the tramways employees, urging him to exercise his influence with the council to upset the arrangements made for the running of the tram service on Christmas Day. The two things taken together place tho Mayor in an awkward position. Mr. M'Laren, no doubt, is entitled to actively participate in his Labour can^aiflQ

work if ho pleases, but we should t lrnvo thought that he would have seen tho undesirableness of carrying on ] his organising work amongst city , corporation employees while filling ( the office of Mayor of the city. What i makes the position worse in some re- 1 spects is that he is reported to have j introduced municipal matters into ] his interview with the tramway men . on Sunday when he and his co- • delegates were seeking to win their support for the United Labour party. Possibly Mr. M'Laren will say that while acting in his capacity as a Labour organiser, the fact that he is also_ Mayor of the city ; would be lost sight of by the tramway employees; but even if this were likely under ordinary circumstances to be the case, he could hardly expect them to continue in such happy ignorance when he took advantage of the occasion to address them on municipal matters. He cannot blame the tramway men if they fail to discriminate between his two offices, and if, when he seeks to induce them to join the ranks of his own particular Labour party, they treat the re3uest as coming from tne Mayor, and esire some quid pro quo from him in that capacity. Nor can he blame citizens generally if they resent an indiscretion which places the Mayor of tho city in such a position.