The Manawatu Herald. Tuesday, January 26th, 1914. NOTES AN COMMENTS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVI, Issue 1198, 20 January 1914, Page 2

The Manawatu Herald. Tuesday, January 26th, 1914. NOTES AN COMMENTS.

Complaints are still being made in Australia of the use of those shameful words, “no encumbrances,” by employers who want “married couples” for work ou farms and stations. The correspondent of the London Times, who drew attention to this matter iu a series of letters three years ago, states iu an article published recently that families are still “cruel hardships'’ iu some parts of the Commonwealth. “ The remedy,” be says, “is the provision of cottages for married farm hands. The small farmer says, often truly enough, that he cannot afford it; and be is certainly so exploited by the middleman (as a Royal in the Stale has just been pointing out) that he does not often get much more than a living out of his produce as it is. But there are quite enough big landowners to set an example, and to absorb all the families likely to be available for some years.” The correspondent adds that the problem can be attacked at its root by “the importation on a large scale of boys, no matter from what source, so loug as they are considered by experienced physicians capable of being built up with good food and good training into steady and hardy countryfolk.” The boys will “see to it that families, and homes for them, are provided when the time comes.” But in the meantime the married man on the spot needs relief.

The Hon. Sir Joshua Williams, who is on the eve of leaving New Zealand, after long and faithful service on the Supreme Court bench, has been saying something to an interviewer concerning Arbitration Court work. As the first President of our Industrial Court, he is an authority thereupon, and his words have weight. He is strongly of opinion that the Judge of the Arbitration Court should not be a Judge of the Supreme Court, and that the Arbitration Court should be separate from the Supreme Court should have nothing to do with it, excepting that the Supreme Court might decide questions of law referred to it by the Arbitration Court. The Supreme Court ought, in his opinion, to be kept as tar apart as possible from social or political matters. The qualifications for a Judge of the Supreme Court and of a judge of the Arbitration Court were not identical, in his opinion. A comparatively small amount of legal knowledge was sufficient for a Judge of the Arbitration Court. The qualities chiefly required were of another sort from those required in the Supreme Court. “A man who might make an admirable Judge of the Arbitration Court might make a very indifferent Supreme Court Judge.” There is no denying that, although in New Zealand we have been fortunate in our Presidents of the Industrial Court.