NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1789, 30 June 1913, Page 6

NOTES OF THE DAY.

Some irrepressible political jokist, we imagine, has been indulging in a gentle gibe at the member for Hutt in suggesting that that gentleman has in mind the formation of a, new party in Parliament. Some time ago Mb. Wilfoed did talk a little about a National party or a, Young New Zealand party, or something of the kind, but somehow the idea seems to have missed fire, and things have moved rapidly in political circles since then.' Mb. Wilfohd, no doubt like a good many others o;/i his side of the House, feds the absurdity, to say nothing of the hopelessness, of the present position of the leaderless Opposition. To see Me. Macdonald one minute, and Mr. G. W. Russell the next, and Me. Wittc a few minutes later, each playing tho role of leader, and knowing moreover that before the day's sitting is closed there will be half-a-dozen others equally ready to jump into thi brcach and fill the gap in tho leadership of the party, must be extreme]} 1 irritating to those followers of "Liberalism" whosyb nerves have already been considerably frayed by the happenings of the past eighteen months. But a new party! where is it to come from ? And what is the matter with Mr. Wilfohd's old party ? Why should not the member for Hutt take that in hand and lick it into shape 1 The Vei-y :gliS.gentlemen Who doclaimed from the stage of the Opera iiouso liist, evening on behalf ot the "Unity 1 ; movement did n<jt mince matters' in expressing their views concerning tho existing dominant political parties. Our anti-Reform friends, who have been hoping and so'neming to ensnare Labour once i/iorc, should really attend some of these meetings, and learn exactly 'what their erstwhile duties now think of them. They might derive a little satisfaction from hearing "Massey" arraigned, but when it came to tho turn of "Ward" and "the Liberal party)" it would be a painful though illuminating experience. The point of view of these very militant "Unity" gentlemen appears to be that tho Reform party represents something very much alive—something to be fought a'nd worth lighting—whereas the "Liberals" are not worth taking serio'asly; they have have had their day, and belong to the past. As one speaker graphically if gruesomely summed it up, there is only the dorpse of the party left. Thero is so much of-truth in this bluntly outspoken estimate of tho position that our anti-Reform friends will probably, and with reason, experience somo discomfort at the thought that their plight is so plainly evident. They ha)/i been playing a game of make-bei'ieve in the hope of getting Labour to come to their assistance, and help them back to office, and Labour is unkind enough to tell them in effcct that it has no use for corpses. At the next general election no doubt the Reform party and Labour will, between them, see that the deceased party is decently interred. A southern Opposition journal, which is said to exercise much influence with its own party, makes protest against the waste of time involved in the Addrcss-in-Reply debate. We are so much in agreement with our contemporary that we venture to make a suggestion to the anti-Reformers. Let them decide—if they can come to any united decision about anything at all—not to speak on the Address-in-Reply. As their journalistic guide points out, they will be only wasting time by talking, and as a matter of fact they are more likely to embarrass the Government by not talking at all in this formal debate than if they spoke for weeks. For one thing they will compel Ministers to bring in theTr Bills at once, and for another they-will avoid exposing their own weakness. We have not much hope, however, of our suggestion finding favour. With the leadership of the party still in the market, tho gentlemen "in the running" will no doubt want to show their paces. Moreover, there are a good many "Independents" about the precincts of Parliament just now, and the party whip of the Opposition has lost its sting. A party held together by nothing stronger than the desire to retain office is difficult to handle whon it lows its one guiding principl® and can ic4 nothing ahond of it on which to build hop 4», and it is probftbl# that any ntUmpt by thtt Gotnmittaa of toadofihip to clom tho mouths of the party would ha followsd by open mutiny on tha part of some of the rank and fili. It is a pleasant outlook—for Mr. Masset and hijiiwrry m«m, Recent English papers to hand contain some very striking facts which go to show that the steady How of emigrants to various parts of the Empire is becoming severely Felt in tho agricultural districts. The departures from Scotland to Canada are stated to have been so Ufrcat that there is a danger of parts

of the country being practically depopulated. "Wherever one travels in rural England and Scotland," says Public Opinion of May 10, "one hears of big parties of emigrants off to Canada or to Australia. This is probably for their own good. The trouble is that on every hand one Sees the need of them in the very counties which the}' are leaving. 1" ive thousand people have sailed from Bristol to Canada since the beginning of the year. Two hundred emigrants a week have been leaving Devonshire for months past, to the alarm of the farmers. And the total is said to be 14,000 for the last 18 months. Last week one Allan liner took 1000 passengers to Canada from while another Allan liner took 400 direct to Canada from Plymouth. Of this last ship the report is that the fine type of emigrant leaving the Old Country was particularly noticeable. The supreme problem obviously is to make the United Kingdom as desirable a p.laoe in which to live as Canada and Australia appeared to be in the dreams of the emigrant." Professor A. Quiller-Couch, the King Edward VII Professor of English Literature at Cambridge, has been drawing great crowds to his lecture rooms. In fact, it is said that he has bceonic quite the "rage" at the University. In one of his recent lectures he made some striking remarks on the Bible as English literature which will be read with special interest at the present time in connection with the Bible-in-Schools controversy in New Zealand. After .stating that most of the Elizabethan prose offended hira, and that only a pedant would ask people to study it, he went on to point out that, as already had happened to our verse through Shakespeare, to our prose there suddenly befell a miracle in the form of the authorised version of the Bible. ' Individual genius such <as Shakespeare's, he continued, wo may allow to come in the conrse.of nature. But how forty-soven i men, not one known outside of this performance for any superlative talent, could have brought that marvel to birthwell, he lhad a somewhat sceptical mind, hut admitted that before such a wonder as that the most sceptical mind must stand humble and aghast. Did if, or did it not. strike them as queer that the peopio who set them "courses of study" in English literature never included tiho English version, which not only intrinsically but historically was out awl away the greatest hook of English prose? Perhaps they paid the _ student the silent compliment of supposing that he was perfectly acquainted with it? He wondered. (Laughter.) When a nation had achieved the manner of diction they found in the ■wonderful language of tlio authorised version, simple men, holy and humble men of heart like Izaak Walton and Bunyan, had their lips touched and spoke to the homelier cadences. Proud men, scholars —Milton and Sir Thomas Browne—practised tho rolling Latin sentences, but on the nobler cadences of our Bible they too fell back. The precise man, Ad<ii9on, could not excel one parable in brevity or in heavenly clarity. Tho Bible controlled its enemy Gibbon as surely as it haunted the curious music of a light sentence of Thackeray. It was in everything wo see. hear, feel, because it was in us, in our blood. The lecturer's views .appear to have met with the hearty approval of his large audience, for they were greeted with prolonged applause.