NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1723, 14 April 1913, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

It iis muoh to be regretted that His Excellency the Governor's other engagements have caused him to decline the pressing invitation of the citizens of Wellington to take part in tho principal functions which have been "arranged in tho capital city of the Dominion for the entertainment of the officers and men of His Majesty's ship New Zealand. The British .Navy is one of the strongest links which bind the people of the overseas Dominions to tho Mother Land. Moreover, it is the King's Navy, and it is only in accordance'with the fitness of things that the Kino's representative should take the leading part in the welcome to New Zealand's gift-ship at its first port of call in this country. No doubt his Excellency has good and sufficient reasons for his decision in this matter, but his absence from Wellington during the present week will,certainly be a great disappointment to those who planned the coming festivities and to the citizens as a whole, This is not in any way a matter of local jealousy, for the people of Wellington would have 'been only too glad, if, after taking part in their rejoicings, his Excellency could also make it convenient to attend the receptions at the other New Zealand ports which our gift warship will visit.

The. cable message of Saturday summarising some trenchant comments by Judge Heydon of the' New South Wales Arbitration Court upon the methods of some trade unions will be thoroughly appreciated by the people of this country. Judge Heydon was specially criticising the readiness of some trade unions to oufc-manoeuvrc other unions, and he pointed out "how far they would go to get boards constituted to suit themselves without regard to anyone else.'' "If a board," he said, "were constituted, which suited the applicants, fit was ,'What a fair Court! What a fair Judge!' But if it, did not suit, then it was, 'What an injustice ! What an outrage! We have boon refused a tribunal to redress our grievances. Wo will strike!' " It is the old story, which is so wull summarised in the shrewd little joke about the trade-unionist who exclaimed, "Arbitration 1 Call that arbitration 1 Why, he's given it against us!" For a long time past the Labour organisations here have boon angry with Judge Siji because ho does not always concede the union's demands. And when they are not being angry with Judge Sim, they aro being angry with the law for not permitting organised Labour to do pretty much as it pleases. No secret has ever been made of the fact thc.fc the Labour-Socialist party

■ wishes to have the laws changed, so as always to declare Labour-Social-ism in the right, or to have for int.er- | prefers of tbo lawmen who cannot holiovo Labour-Socialism over to be in the wrong. No good, cihise over throve, .or was ever expected to thrive, on such a negation of justice as that. Most people will watch with interest for the next, development of the quarrel between Mr. Lloyd-George and .Mr. Kebty-Fletcher, a Unionist member of the House of Commons. It. was Mr. Kebty-Fletciier who, during the severe examination of Mr. Lloyd-George at the Marconi inquiry, asked the Chancellor whether his official salary was not large enough to make speculation on the Stock Exchange unnecessary to him. _A master in the art of making insulting references to the incomes of private persons, Mr. Lloyd- ■ George, like a true Eadical, angrily resented any reference to his own large public salary. He not only abused Mr._ Kebty-Fletciier, but challenged him to repeat his question, "in a place it would subject you to prosecution." The Chancellor did not name the place in which a. policeman would arrest the Unionist member for sacrilege, ■ or something of the sort; but Mr. Kebty-Fletcher has, anyway, repeated his question publicly; If Mr. Lloyd-George was not merely "bluffing", in the hope of persuading people that his critic had libelled him under cover of privilege, he must take legal action nou;. What . must have puzzled most people- was 'the _ Chancellor's resentment of "privileged" criticism. Like a good many Radical M.P.'s nearer home, •Mr. LlOyd-George has availed himself to the full of the right to.slander private people with impunity by doing it in. the House. A phase of the death of Captain Oates, which was sure sooner or later to be discussed, was the moral aspect of his noble Eelf-sacrificc. In various quarters his death has been regarded as suicide, and the question arises: Can we here make an exception to the rulo that self-destruction is a sin 2 There are doubtless some few very rigid minds which will answer in the"negative; but all of us know (even if we cannot reason it out) that an affirmative is required. The Catholic Church's doctrine in these matters is very strict, and our readers will probably read with pleasure a paragraph in the March issue of The Month: tr ."T° commit .suicide," says the writer, is to compass one's own death, directly and designedly, which is as morally wrong* as to kill another in th© same way. In order, then, to constitute the crime of self-murder, two things must coincide— tho object sought must bo self-destruc-•tion, tho means chosen must bo directly productive of that object.' Now tlio mail! intention of Captain Oates was to relievo Ins companions of a burden, His death, though, it would have had' that effect, was in no ways essential to it: had ho by some miraculous ohanco managed to save himself apart, his aim would have been equally well attained. And' he took no positive means to kill himself, as, for instance, shooting himself with a revolverho gavo up his life rather than took it. A few illustrations will,make the case ,still] clearer. That man, 'then, is a hero like Captain Oates, and not a suicide, who, in a shipwreck, gives his lifebelt to another, and allows himself to drown, or who leaps from a sledge closely pursued by wolves so that its other occupants may escapo,. or who cuts tho rope above his head which would otherwise drag his com-panion-climbers with him into the abyss. .In none of theso cases is the means chosen, of its own nature productive of death, although in the circumstances death may be inevitable; in none is the death of tho hero a necessity for the accomplishment of his object, although' he knows,_ as a matter of fact, that 6uch. is the price he will have to pay. It is tho highest act of charity to give your life for your friend; it is an. offence against God to take your own life for whatever object. To tho man in the street this distinction may seem to be mere casuistry, and to tho man in an emergency it would probably not occur, but it is necessary if wo would rightly appreciate the objective moral value of such deeds." This is an excellent identification of moral doctrine with good human instincts.