NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1757, 23 May 1913, Page 4

NOTES OF THE DAY.

Professor Hunter has returned to the charge and wants to know some- [ thing further of our views upon tho 5 question of Bible lessons in State - schools. We should have thought that we had made our position clcar [ enough by this time. There is plain ; evidence that a large section of the ' community is in favour of the introduction of some form of Bible lessons in schools. _ Professor Hunter may dispute this—we do not know whether ho does or not —but v/e arc satisfied that the feeling on the subject is at least sufficiently strong to make it certain that unless some means is devised of testing public opinion concerning it, there will be a long and possibly increasingly bitter struggle to secure the right now claimed. Tho questions involved are not such, as should be'allowed to cloud the issues of a general election; indeed, it is difficult, if not impossible, to estimate tho voice of public opinion on any issue of this kind if it is included amongst the many issues on which Parliamentary candidates seek the support of the electors. Moreover, it is an issue on which the people arc qualified to express a direct opinion through the ballot. Therefore we believe the best method of settling the question is to submit it to the people by referendum. The issue which should be submitted is open to argument, but if should clearly lest public opinion as to whether Bible lessons should bo given in school hours. If a large and influential section of the community ask for a referendum on a specific question, that question ought to be put to .the people, and not something else; but there should be a clear issue on which an elector can vote "yes" or "no" without confusion. We think the lessons by the clergy should be given in school hours because of the great difficulty of getting the children together before the ordinary time, and because it would be most undesirable, lo start the religions lesson after tho children had finished their day's work. They would be naturally tired and rest-| less, and teaching under such circumstances would be of little value. | >

If given before or after school the lesson would bo a hardship both to idren and parents. This is, we believe, candidly admitted by many of those who are not in sympan, with the Biblc-in-Schools League.

The farming community generally no doubt feel very much as the President of the Auckland Provincial Farmers' Union feels respecting the effect of the long-continued wave of Labour unrest on farming interests. The farmer up to the present has had to bear much of the brunt of the warfare which has been, and is still being, waged, and he has had very little opportunity of making his voice heard or his influence felt.. His interests may be imperilled or his finances crippled by • a strike of slaughtermen, or of wharf labourers, or of seamen, and he has had to sit down and watch his fat stock eating off his feed, instead of making way for a fresh lot; or he stays helpless at home while his wool clip or his mutton or his butter is held up at the nearest seaport, perhaps missing the advantages of a good market overseas. The strikers may have a just grievance, or they may not, but the farmer has to suffer, and up to the present he has made little effort to protect his own interests in this direction. Mr. Lusk, the President of the Auckland Provincial Farmers' Union, suggests that there is a way, and perhaps it is the only way. "There appears to be no other sure way," he said, "of protecting our [farming] industries from dislocation, ruinous delays, and absolute | blackmailing than by firm and positive agreement between all farmers personally to shear and slaughter, ship or unship, whenever or wherever strikes occur which threaten to damage our business." While this method of protecting his interests may not always be practicable to the farmer, there are occasions when he can with advantage to himself and to the whole community step into tin arena of strife and make the weight of his strength and influence felt. It is an old cry, but a true one, that you cannot cripple the primary producer without hurting the townspeople and everyone else.

The Minister for Public Works has been explaining to the good people of Palnatua and elsewhere that liis caution is not pessimism. This of course is true enough, but sometimes caution, if too frequently emphasised, may be mistaken for pessimism, and. it is just as well perhaps that Me. Fkasee took the opportunity to correct those who have been twisting his utterances to suit their own ends. Tho policy laid down some time ago that "money is no object!" may have been an excellent catchcry for a party which pre: ferred pleasant-sounding quips and fancies to solid facts and sound finance; but it did not build any more bridges or metal any more roads than there was money to pay for. _ It sounded big and cheerful, out it encouraged the belief that to ask was to receive, and although time proved the fallacy of this idea, the extravagant notions it developed die hard, and the country is still suffering from the effects of the false conceptions raised of the bottomless nature of tho State purse. If the Masses Government chose, it might perpetuate tho methods of the Continuous Ministry of big promises and small performance. It was a cheap method of winning popularity to promise more than could be performed, but it was not an honest policy, and it was bound, as it did, to land those who -practised it in difficulties. The sound and straightforward'course—the only statesman- ! like policy—is to take the public into tho confidence of the Government and let then; see for themselvescxactly what funds are available, and to ensure that the money will be distributed fairly throughout the country and expended to the best advantage. This oourse will not cither rcducc or increase the amount actually available fo" expenditure, but it will do away with the necessity for making rash promises impossible of fulfilment; and, after all, most people prefer frankness and open dealing to be innfooled bv vague promises and paper votes which never materialise into hard cash.