THE CONTROL OF AVIATION.

Putaruru Press, Volume VI, Issue 221, 26 January 1928, Page 4

THE CONTROL OF AVIATION.

It is not unnatural that as a result of the tragic end of the attempt of Lieut. Moncrief and Captain Hood to fly across the Tasman Sea some people should be blaming the New Zealand and Australian Governments for allowing the airmen to start, and asking for stricter control in the future. The Sydney Morning Herald says that the machine was not “ airworthy,” and that the airmen rejected the professional advice tendered to them— statements which are denied by Captain Right—and that the two Governments therefore are guilty of having “ passively condoned ” the “ general recklessness of the venture.” Although both Governments washed their hands of all responsibility, the Herald maintains that ‘‘ with official control of flying, all Government responsibility is not so easily disowned.” Now, although, as we have said, it is at the moment natural to wish that Governments shall control the liberty of adventurous airmen, sober reflection will lead most people to believe that the less there is of official control and regulation the better it will be. Nobody would dream of objecting to official rules regulating other kinds of locomotion, or of commercial aviation, because here there are other interests to be considered than the interests of the men in charge of the machine. But when an airman makes up his mind to fly from New York to Paris, or from Sydney to Wellington, he is undertaking what is strictly his own business, and is not interfering with the liberty or safety of anyone but himself. Nothing but the modern mania for official regulation can account for the overlooking of this fact. Nevertheless, it may be argued, the Government is entitled to protect the adventurous flyer against himself. But if the Government is to protect everyone against Jiimself it ■will have no time to do' anything else. We should be greatly surprised if the view we are expressing is not one which every free aviator in the world would not fully support. If men had always had to wait for offi-

cial inspection and governmental approval before leaving their firesides the world would have made very little progress. The ships of Drake and Cabot and Columbus were solemnly

“ vetted ” before these rash individualists sailed from their home ports. Nor were the pioneers of land exploration required to satisfy some official or other that they had complied with the regulations. The ancient travellers who opened up unknown worlds went ofl without an Order-irs-Coun-cil; Marco Polo would never have ! reached the court of Kublai if Venice 'had had the'benefit of the twentieih■eentury conception of the State’s right to meddle. There is probably‘nruch that may yet be discovered in. the fields of air by bold and courageous flyers, but discovery will be retarded if official's and Governments take and exercise a large power of control and interference and prohibition —Christchurch Press.