The Rangitikei Advocate. WEDNESDAY, JULY 3, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8854, 3 July 1907, Page 2

The Rangitikei Advocate. WEDNESDAY, JULY 3, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES.

IT is pleasing to find that Mr Justice Sim is too sensible to listen to the absurd -suggestion of Mr Tregear that wages should be fixed on a profit sharing basis. There is, of course, no provision in the Arbitration Act that the profits made by employers if they exceed a certain amount should be handed over to the worker, but the Unionist representatives before the Arbitration Court have not been slow to adopt Mr Tregear’s hint, and claim that they have a right to share in profits. Justice Sim pointed out the practical difficulty that men would have to go without wages if there were no profits, and laid down the principle that the Court should endeavour to give men remuneration for their work regardless'of whether the employers got profits or not. Profit coaid only be taken into consideration nTestreme cases where an increase in wages would wipe out business. The' fact in regard to ■wages is that the wage-earner cannot ■ ' J 14. V K «w !

afford to take risks which are possible for .a capitalist. He must in bad as well as good years receive enough to keep him alivo, whereas 'the employer can generally struggle on in bad seasons, hoping to recoup his losses when things become more prosperous. The employee thus gives up his right to share in profits, because he cannot he expected to share in losses. The assumption that underlies many of the demands for higher wages is that employers as a rule make more than a fair profit. It is often forgotten that the employer’s share consists first of his own wages, which arc naturally high, as ho has all the anxiety of managing his business, and second, of interest on the capital invested, which must also ho at a higher rate than if it were placed in an absolutely safe investment; In any case the field is open for any who think .that tiro profits of business are unduly largo to join the number of employers aud share the proceeds of the supposed gold mine.

IT is gradually Joeing borne in upon us that Mr Deakin is little but a mere windbag, producing plenty ox sound of fury, but nothing more. It was stated at the recent Imperial Conference that Australia, or rather Mr Deakin, bad decided to withdraw from the existing agreement with the British Admiralty, and build a fleet for the defence of Australia. Sir Joseph Ward fully expressed the opinion of most New Zealanders when he said that New Zealand had no intention of attempting to build a fleet, and though she would not put an obstacle in the way of any action taken by Australia, New ZeaInad preferred to keep to the present agreement. On Saturday last Mr Deakin gave an address to the Australian Natives’ Association, in •which he dealt with naval matters. So far as wo can judge from the cabled report of his speech it was a very eloquent one, but we look in vain for information of a definite character. He mentioned the tact that they had grown to what they were because they had rested under the shelter of the British flag, but high spirited people could not be content to sit still under the shelter of any flag without helping in its defence. In touching tones lie cried “Heaven help the Empire or any part’of it if it breaks away from the Imperial navy,’’ and told his audience that they could only he considered tenants, and undeserving tenants, of their land if they did not do something to defend it. But when we ask in cold blood what Mr Deakin thinks ought to bo done, or how he is going tohlo it, we find no reply, and we cannot but feed that Mr Deakiu, though eloquent, fails to sec that words are’valueloss unless they are merely a prelude to action.

WE arc sometimes surprised to meetmen of insignificant stature woo possess really enormous voices, and to wonder how so powerful vocal organs can he concealed in so small and puny an envelope. Somewhat the same feeling assails us when we read the pronouncements of that futile organisation, the Independent Political and Labour League. On Saturday we recei red a telegram informing us that the I.P.L.L. had issued a manifesto pointing out that the system of depending on private enterprise to supply the,needs of the community never can bo satisfactory to workers. Fortunately, the society with the long name is ready wich a remedy—the only remedy, in fact namely, State or Municipal control. The League points, out that iu tjio past fifteen years wages have only increased 8)4 per cent, or Is 8d iu the £, while the cost of living has advanced by 30 per cent, or 6s in the £. It is always unwise to give reasons for the conclusions arrived at, because it offers an opening to the enemy for producing counter arguments. Wo will not stop to examine the accuracy or inaccuracy of the figures provided, but merely point out that they form a far stronger argument, if true, against State industries than for them. Now Zealand during the past fifteen years has been leading the world in socialistic legislation, and the result, according to the socialists themselves, is desperately unsatisfactoryThe ordinary man is apt to conclude that we are on the wrong road, and to suggest that it njight he wise to turn hack before it is too late, but the League urges us on still further, assuring us that if we only pursue the road that is apparently loading us away from our destination sufficiently ’far it will bring us to the place we desire to reach.