COMMERCIAL MORALITY

New Zealand Times, Volume XLII, Issue 9795, 19 October 1917, Page 3

COMMERCIAL MORALITY

To the Editor “N.Z. Times.” Sir, —In 3' o'Ur report of a deputation to the Mayor of certain hotel proprietors was interesting reading. Through no fault of theirs the terms of their contract with the Incensing Bench had been varied. The fees amounting to nearly £2OOO had been handed over to the... City Corporation. These fees were in payment of a 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. license, and as tho license has been curtailed tho hotelkeepers are justified in equity at least, if not in common justice, to a proportionate rebate. His .Worship tho Mayor has no regard for tho “scrap of paper” which the hotelkeepers obtained. and in this he is following the example of Parliament itself. The Germans gave an undertaking, and signed a bond, that they would respect the neutrality of Belgium; but they invaded and plundered that country. In New Zealand' the electors gave an undertaking to the hotel keepers that there would bo no variation in the licensing system until another general election. The prohibitionists and an alleged: business men’s committee, moved heaven and earth to violate the undertaking or contract which tho people of Now Zealand sealed with their votes. And they Succeeded in getting Parliament to ratify tho violation. We will bo told, as Mr Luke told tho deputation, that this is war-time, and somebody must make a sacrifice. But Isn’t this exactly tho tone and attitude which the Germans assumed towards Belgium? They said in effect: “This is war, and you must bo sacrificed in order that we might win.” And so the hotelkeepers are being sacrificed that the prohibitionists might win. But it seems to mo, sir, to be such an exhibition of a low state of commercial morality, _ that tho better class of people, with a due sense of what is honour able conduct between man and man, must hold in abhorrence. Another thought is that those people who are making scapegoats of others are making little sacrifice themselves to win tho war, and it doesn’t say very much for the commercial morality of Parliamentarians and Mayors of cities when Obey will ruthlessly destroy contracts entered into, and give no sympathy to the appeals for relief of honest citiBons who in ail good faith accepted the contract from the people. If Parliament fails to respect the “scrap of paper” given by the people, how can they order the punishment of the working people, of the trade unionists. who, having entered into a contract binding upon them for three years with- regard to rates of pay, tear that “scrap of paper” to pieces, and casting them t 0 tho winds defy Parliament? Parliament has sot an example. Politicians of this country ought to have a higher moral stand-, nrd than tho people they represent. Tho example of Parliament in this matter will bo taken as tho keynote for con> mon action in all departments of our public and domestic affairs. Still, it is a great pity that in a community like this one section cannot be trusted by another, and that one section will, without regard to commercial sense or Imosty, compel its neighbour to make sacrifices which it would nob suggest being imposed upon itself. One wonders how far the dishonesty of a movement will bo allowed to go' in its disregard for public contracts.—l am, etc., JUSTUS.