TOPICS OF THE DAY

Evening Post, Volume LXXXV, Issue 26, 31 January 1913, Page 6

TOPICS OF THE DAY

The country is still awaiting the Prime Minister's An Unfortunate explanation of* the Land Transaction, position which has arisen under his Land Act, with regard to coal-bearing lands held under lease-in-perj/etuity. It is alleged that the Act gives tho freehold, with the right to mine the coal, on payment of the surface value Only; a-nd that, by this means, a Southland lessee-in-perpetuity has obtained for £46 16s the fee-simple of land and coal deposits worth many thousands. While , on his Taupo tour, Mr. Massey, as Minister for Lands, was asked by the Evening Post for his explanation of the position, and deferred a statement pettding a Departmental investigation into the law and the facts; and that is how matters stand to-day. It is true that he was warned by Mr. Hanan, during the Land Bill debate, of the very danger which is now alleged to have arisen; still, the fact that he did not give due weight to that warning does not necessarily impugn his motives. Indeed, no one seems to be more surprised than Mr. Massey that such a position could have arisen under his Act ; hor' does he admit that it has arisen, pending; the investigation now afoot. There is, however, one portion of his Hastings utterance from which we must strongly dissent. He was reported as saying that "even if a dozen men got their land at less (price) than they should have done, it was not going to prevent his Government from giving the settlers of NewZealand what they have been asking for so long — the freehold of the land they work. ( We cannot agree that it is either just or necessary to give one man more than his due in order that others may have their due. We believe that the new law could have carried safeguards with regard to mineral-bearing leases, just as the old law did. If it is true, as restarted, that further applications for the freehold of coal-bearing leases have been "held over" by the Southland Land Board, then that is a tacit_ admission of the need of discriminatory power. But has the Land Board or the Minister any discrimination at all under the new law? Sub-section 2 of section 31 says : "The delivery of the notice to the Commissioner shall constitute a contract between the lessee and the Crown for the purchase and sale of the said land." Does this not mean that the giving by the lessee of notice of his intention to purchase constitutes a binding contract? And, if so, how can the Land Board or the Minister "hold the matter over"? The Post's opinion that the late Labour Csnference was dominated Without by Ultra-Socialists is conDisguise, firmed by the Red Federation's official organ, The Maoriland Worker, this week. "Out of the conference," says the Worker, "has come an understanding and appreciation of the place of the twin forces of Syndicalism and Socialism in the Labour movement, and with this a recognition of the, wisdom of retaining the best of each in the war upon the capitalist system. Working-class action is ho{ eless unless its industrial activities he dominated by the Syndicalist spirit and its political activities be dominated by the Socialist spirit." After gleeful comments on the raw-Redness of the proposed constitution of the "United Federation of Labour" and the "Social Democratic Party," the Worker remarks :—"lt: — "It seems to us that a revolutionary position has been reconciled to a workable tactic." This is tantamount to an assertion that the oil and water of "revolution" and "evolution" have been happily mixed to make a patent medicine, an elixir to change man into super-man. The United Labour Party's executive has not yet broken its silence (publicly) about tho results of the con-< fcrence. One of tho delegates, Mr. Tregear, has written unofficially to The Post that the actions of hitnselt and his comrade, Mr. W. T. Mills, did not commit the unions of the party. We have not. declaied that tho unions would bo bound 15y tho votes of tho two dele-

gates who, according to Mr. Tregear, represented the Dominion Executive. Our contention, on the available evidence, was that the executive bad blundered, and an explanation i* still awaited by the public. What has the executive to say about "the twin forces of Syndicalism and Socialism"? Serious, able- men in London liave engaged in cleVer conThe Right troverey about the to Starve. starvation rights of lawless suffragettes whose excesses place them in prison. When one of the wild women, Mre. Drummond, fit companion for the chief desperado, Mrs. Despard. wa6 sentenced to a fortnight in gnol, in the second division, ehe ejaculated :— - "For shame! You mean the first division. Th&t'S will be a hunger strike." Mi*. Drummond, like other "Hammerzonians," prefers genteel martyrdom. Her lip curia at th^ thought of mingling in the second division with, "common women," whose crime may haVo been loss injurious lo tho public than the sfeupid, malicious mischief of the wild-cat sisterhood. The woman who sleak a loaf of bread for ho- starving children may bo hustled into Iho second division, without mercy, and she has scant hope of release by "hunger" tactics. Tho militant suffragettes have been comparatively privileged criminals in their raids ngainet the public peace and property. These screeching^ Mrenada are not the wives nor tho sisters of working men, nor are they specially anxious to get votes for those women, who have no leisure foi* howling and snfashing demonstrations in London's streets. Many of the senseless revolutionaries have social and other influence, which mitigates tho penalty that they should suffer. Indeed, the leniency of tho Government in some cases has been an incitement to the crowd to take summary vengeance. The "hunger eljriko" has easily unlocked the gaol doors. Mr. Bernard Shaw, friendly to the suffragettes, contends that they have the right to starve themselves if they choose, and this opinion must be shared by the vast majority of Britons,, especially ac the "strikers'* do not 6eem to be earning a living for any dependents. As Mr. W. T. Mills would say, "they are not useful people." A prominent New Zealander (with all duo deference _ to the British Cabinet) hns a suggestion to discourage the 6eekers of notoriety. He recommends an indeterminate Gontence for the crazy agitatova. Thus a woman, normally' weighing eleven stone, who fined herself down to, say, seven or eight etone, by refusing food, would be released when the gaol surgeon decided that life was in danger, but she would be liable to another ai Irest when she had recovered the poundage necessary for health. She could be recommitted on a medical certificate to the effect that she was in a condition to further starve herself- for a certain period if ehe so desired, Thus would the "romance" be knocked out of those ridiculous "hunger strikes,", and by such common-cense treatment a public nuieance would be abated.