PUBLIC OPINION.

Hokitika Guardian, 23 August 1928, Page 4

PUBLIC OPINION.

THE SIMPLE ENGLISH OF IT. “ It is no wonder that men and women who hate war, and do not I understand talk about ‘gaps,’ ‘sanctions,’ ‘optional clauses’ and ‘protocols’ turn with relief and a new hope to a man who talks a language they can understand, and proposes to abolish war by the simple process of saving solemnly in a treaty that it is abolished. One may admit that it will need more than an incantation to exorcise this particular devil, and yet feel that Mr Kellogg’s treaty does a very real and substantial service to the cause of peace. It has concentrated the attention of the world once more upon the fundamental wickedness of all war.' It declares for the first time that all disputes, no matter what their origin, ought to he settled by peaceful means of some kind. It brings the United States again into at least an abstract unity of aim with the League of Nations. It is not, perhaps, for adherents of the League to point out that the

Kellogg Treaty may not, in actual fact, prevent dll future wars. If the Kellogg Treaty needs hi ling out, so do the methods of the League.”—“Manchester Guardian.” A VIEW OF DEMOCRACY. “Mr I3onar Law once very aptly remarked to the House of Commons that one of the great temptations to democracy was to underpay its servants. It is a temptation to which Britain appears of late years unhappily to have succumbed, so far at least as its Ministers of State are concerned .’’—Glasgow “Herald. ’ ’ BUSINESS AND GOVERNMENT. “Our business friends are fond of saying that there should he more business men in the administration of government. I heartily concur with them. Ihe government is a vast business machine spending more than three and a half billions yearly, and good business men ought to he charged with the administration of that great fund. What the business man overlooks, however, is that if the government has a business side, business just as surely has a human and social side. Business io-day is no longer a small affair involving the relations of individuals. It is a cast affair involving the relations of great groups. It is full of human problems as well as financial, mechanical, and economic problems. And if good business brains are needed to cope with the purely commercial problems, good statesmen are no less wanted to understand the troublesome and pressing human problems. I, therefore, respectfully submit to the slogan makers this germ idea, from which, 1 1 am sure, they will be able to fashion a euphonious and forceful phrase:

“ J.ess business interference in government, and more statesmanship in busi.noss.”—Mr J. T. Flynn, in “Harper’s Monthly.” PROFIT-SHARING. “Tlie profit-sharing movement in this country is a plant of slow hut. fairly steady growth,” says the “Scotsman.” “ In the process it has shed a considerable number of leaves; in other words, many of the schemes have, for one reason or another, come to an end. But the total number of schemes in existence, as well as the total number of employees participating, has tended upwards. The annual inquiry by the Ministry of Labour shows that at the end of 1027 there were 440 undertakings of all kinds in Great Britain and Northern Ireland practising profit-shar-ing, and as seven firms had each two separate schemes in operation, the total number of schemes was 447. About 437,000 workpeople were employed in the businesses concerned, ol whom 235,000 participated or were entitled to participate in the benefits of the schemes. Of the existing schemes, 28 have been in operation for 2S years or longer; 38 were started between 1901 and 1910; 58 between 1911 and 1918; 83 in 1919 and 1920; and CO between 1921 and 1C27.”

1 I ; “Beauty and fitness, whether in buildings or in life, form part of the modern social state, il we mean it to progress and develop. Tint such amenities mean much care in maintaining, them, and attempts by individuals or bodies, who for a mere commercial gain would thoughtlessly sacrifice the, whole beauty of a town or (oinitryside. must he chocked No one will deny that it is necessary to open up the country lin'd establish new industries or areas for residential purposes, lint the methods usually adopted generally detract seriously from the value, and if wo hope to keep any parts of England as country pure and simple, we must devote all our energies to directing this flood of immigration into right channels, and to prevent il from dribbling all over the counfrytide, to try and stop the sporadic spread of towns and retain some land as actual country. Had we as a people realised—perhaps not more than ten years ago—the full meaning and import ol motor transport, had wo but taken some precautionary measures to guide or decently control j it, there would not have been this wholesale desecration of the countryside which we all deplore. But our usual methods of pandering to the immediate and generally ill-considered needs of the public, unaccompanied as they awe by any prophetic vision on the part of our governing bodies, have ill contributed to this result.—Mr If. Cfuy Dauber, R.1.8.A. j TWO VIEWS OK Hb'-ITOBY. “We can only know history through I a record. This is true of every type l of history, whether it lie geological I history, or stellar history, or any other branch of history. Thus lor geoI logical history our record for perusal is the earth itself, and for astronomical history the whole stellar universe. In the case of that branch of history which usually monopolises the term, pur chief record is the written book. Thus the record itself become:; the history, and the history the record. Now this two-fold meaning would cause no confusion in discussion if the record always corresponded exactly with the reality it' recorded. But inasmuch as this is seldom, if ever, so, it is easy to see how amhigious may he a discussion of the relation of history to any ether specific branch of knowledge or of reality. Of the same period of time we may have, not one, but a hundred ‘histories,’ differing in most important respects from one another. Let, for example, certain American records of the American War of independence be read alongside certain British re-

‘T.EAUTY AND FITNESS.”

cords of that same war. Many of tlio statements of fact will be found to be the same, but when the suppressions, tlie exaggerations, the divergent emphases, the attribution of conflicting motives are duly noted there is no longer cause for surprise that an American and a British schoolboy each derive considerable patriotic gratification from the same history.” —Rev. C. J. Wright, 8.D., writing in the “'Modern Churchman.” SWEATING OUR PUBLIC MEN. ‘‘We have always been fortunate enough in Britain to produce generation after genreation of men and women who have given their time to the State without much regard for their private financial affairs,” asserts the ‘‘Sunday Times.” The amount of unpaid or grossly underpaid work of a public character that is done in these islands is one of the most tangible proofs that could be offered of the practical patriotism of our people. It is a form of voluntary service that most certainly ought not to he discouraged. But neither should it be traded on. It is just as undesirable that wealthy men should be bled white by their work for the country, as it. is that men of moderate means should be kept through purely financial reasons from entering Parliament, and bolding office. To make membership of the Legislature or Ministerial rank wliat the city would call an ‘ attractive commercial proposition ’ would be to infest our public life with crowds of professional gold-diggers. On the other band, to penalise a man in bis private estate because he has nelgected it in the service of the nation, is both mean, and bad economy.