NOTES OF THE DAY.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1994, 27 February 1914, Page 6

NOTES OF THE DAY.

TflEltt; h an Opposition, journal in the. south, the ljuftcdin <j>'ty.r, which is at times refreshingly independent in expressing its opinions on political aad other, questions of the hour. While other Opposition paper's have been vainly endeavouring to bolster up Sie Joseph Wakd in the effort he is making to cover tip his unfortunate attituds during the strike, the Btar plainly and bluntly refuses to littve auy of it. The strike refer* ciieesof the Loader of the Opposition in his Winton speech provoked the following candid remarks from ,fche Duftedjftjournal:—-

"We havo no desire to'continue a con> trover?}' that was the reverse of pleas-; ant to ourselves, but We tire compelled id' «iy here that .Sir Joseph's explanation of the reasons that Midaesd hiin- to iiitefvens in the waterside workers' strike and Mlulifi n sensational spoerth oil the floor of the House is altogether viiMoiivitMsinir. : We (vera in YVol-iinKteu at the time of the . unfortunate occurrence in Past Office Square, am have no doubt whatever that but for the firmness of the authorities- and for the' Strang measures adopted by the Ministry, hi respect to which tht Jlilii-ster of Justice has never yet received his proper raced of public a-eknow-kdgtaent, -what was- a very ugly business would have developed iuta- "a riot that' might havo been tallowed by serious damage to.property, and even loss of life. Ve, lita many oilier retidfents front the south, were ou the very, edge of the crowd Which the 'specials' dispersed, awl compared notes at, the. time with man who are neither given to exaggeration nor apt to 'loss* their heads"; and 'their testimonies bore put tlia cpiiiious expressed, in the columns of tins paper {.he next day. and ere worth po-ndej'ntjr now that esfliteftrant lias died down, With every wish to l>e charitable to kirn, we think that Sir Joseph en that day tailed to make indefientlemt inquiries' as to what act witty took plow; mndo himself tho mmit-hpicce.of others-' distortedversioUs; and placed himself before tho i&iise and the country in a false lishfe, leading to the belief—very widespread at ■ the moment-thai life sympathies were with t.kosa who were causing; all the trouble on tire Wellington 'WAtMfrjmt. Jlis proper course was to have sided with and to have thrown tlie full weight of his influence into the scale with Ministcrs in their endeavours. to uphold at. cvsrv o«st the maintenance of law and erdVr at what was undeniably the most critical pfease of tho existing trouble/" These comments, comhig as. they do from ofte c»f the most influential of his own newspaper supporters, speak for themselves. _ Naturally the Star states the position as mildly as possible, but it has not shirked what must have been to it an. unpleasant tasfc

The exposure of Sir Joseph Warp's misrepresentation at Winton of the increase of taxation which has taken place'under Massey Government has been met in quite ctorMteristie fashiofi by the New Zealand fimts.. It will be recalled that the Leader of the Opposition in his Winton speech' said 'that "since liny [the Massey Government} have taken offke the taxation* of the people has increased by 10s. 3d. per. head for every rtian, woman, and child i« the 17omiaion," and he added: "You will find it stated [in the Official Year IkoL-] that the taxa(tioii li'licn th'-' H"o/y/ GiweriweM left ' office in IVU was £4 ICs. lid. The i first year of the Masses Government j it rose to £5 3s. iOcl, and in 19K5 it | further rose to £o 7s. 2d.'' We ! showed frorn his own authority, the I Official Year ifofilc, iha.l Sin JosepU ! Waed had him sanity of an inexj cusaMe blunder: and that his aceu.isa'tion was absolutely unfounded- "In j the first place, the Wars Government did Hot leave, office in 1811. [ hut in 1812; in the second place, the

increase from £-1 ies. lltl. in 1911' to -E3 3b. lod. in 1812 not only did not'occur under the Massey Government, but aetunUi/ occurred when tih' Joseph Ward himself ivm Prime Minister utid Minister nf finance.; in the third place, the Massey Government did not enter office until July 10, 1918, and therefore could not bo held wholly, if nt all responsible even .for ths increase for the financial year ended March 31, 1913. How Sir Joseph Waud could have blundered so absurdly in cliiiiijirtg to have left office in Hill, and i» attempting to saddle the Massey Gov- ■; eminent with the responsibility for increased taxation per head of the i population which the official records show the Ward GoveriMimit was responsible for, it is for the Leader of j the Opposition to explain as best'he can. The outstanding fact remains that ho grossly misrepresented th.c position when he stated that he left office in I9H, and-,: that the Massey Government was responsible for the increase- of 10s. 3d., in the taxation per head which had since occurred. These facts are beyond all dispute, But the yew Zealand Times, in its own .tortuous fashion, still endeavours to convey the impression that the }os, 3d. increase, referred to by Sir Joseph Ward was dus to the Massey ■Government. It quotes the 1011 and 1913 figures set out above, afid does, so in such a manner as. to convey the impression thafc the lieform Oovcniinent was re-spottsiMc for the increase. It is very stupid [of it, for it merely serves to direct further attention to Sir Joseph Warp's unfortunate lapse. Sin. Joseph, in his speech at Dunedin last evoftiti(r, had the good sense to admit bis error.; but it would ho expecting too much to look for such an admission from his local newspaper mouthpiece!

Tre latest phase, of the Home Rule controversy must be distinctly disappointing to those who have been toping far some real progress in.the direction of a set-tlemafit by floftseat. It was announced a few days ago thai Jjjj, Asq&ith had promised that he would, ulthflut delay, submit to Parliament some • suggestions with the object of bringing about a peaceful solution, of . the problem. He also declared that there was frothing the Ooverrimeiit would not, do, consistent with. the fundamental principles of the Bill, to avoid civil war. tfhis Was cd by several conciliatory speeches from both sides, including a remarkable utterance by Sir E»wXnft Carson, and a statement by Mr., Biekeix that they were, approach-* ing nearer to peace wten Silt Edward Carson admitted that 'the exclusion of Ulster would get yid of the fear of civil. wal\ It was generally regarded that the.outlook had greatly improved, mfld-.ifc-w.a-s suh-sc-i.jne.ntly. "authoritatively" announced by the News of the World that a sflttleinent was a-sstiWd cm the basis of the exclusion of fo-ur no-rtlj--eastorn counties- for a- fixed ter-jn, with the option thereafter of coming under the jurisdiction of the Irish Parliament. But a change has now come over t|e_ situation, and Sin. Asijtjifn's conciliatory iii&od appears have departed. Perhaps he thinks it is necessary to adopt an Hnco-mpro-mising attitude for l leaf lest people should say the result -of the JJeth.nal 'Green election, hid, shaken--his ricrvtsV' The suggestionslie promisod to make "without tk» lay" have now been, postponed until the second reading of the;Bill In the face ai this new turn of event's I Mr. Bqsae Law declares that the; Clovernmeat Must either go to the eouritj-y or exclude Ulster, while Mr. William o'Bbies is equally emphatic in asserting thfcfc "the don of Ulster is the s*ne amendment which canftoi be made..' 1 IV Unionists will no doubt do their, utmost to force a- dissolution, They ha\'g good groajid for encouragement in' the recant bj'-cjeitiflos; but the ■coalition of Liberal, Labcnii', and Rationalist members still holds together -firmly, and Me. Asquith has stated more than once that he has no intention of goiiig to the country before- the ■ Bill has been placed wpoi-i the Statute Beck.