Rangitikei Advocate. TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8899, 20 August 1907, Page 2

Rangitikei Advocate. TUESDAY, AUGUST 20, 1907. SECOND EDITION. EDITORIAL NOTES.

welfare of all the natural Indusk . c tries, g WE believe it would benefit the f farmers if they paid more attention to other matters than the freoholc , t particularly to the enforcement ot <■ their demand that Customs duties shall bo levied for revenue purposes only. The freehold, of course, is i worth fighting for, and the national ] endowments should be opposed with : every force. But even if a Ministry succeeded in destroying the freehold ; entirely, and made the State the solo landlord, that Ministry would ; go out of office at a- following elcc- . tiou if it refused to give the leaseholders the freehold title on thenown terms. But while the present . Ministry fire frightening farmers With land legislation they arc heaping further burdens on them, and the main attention of tiie farmers is given to the land question. The demands of the Agricultural Labourers’ Union should alone bo sufficient to show the farmers that i hcro are greater and more imminent dangers than the prospect of > the temporary destruction of the freehold title. There are also dangers , in connection with the franchise j itself, and those are not confined to the proposed extension of it to uourntepayers. Of late years the number of those in receipt of pay from the State has boon very largely . increased by the creation of new dc- , partmeuts, and by the appointment ■ of a small army of inspectors, etc., j nudlSr the various Acts vide for the collection of fees and the imposition of penalties. A large ; class has been created who are directly interested in opposing any economical reform, and who may be relied on to support any political party who will promise to give them more from the public purse. The farmers, and the pooplopvho are not in receipt of State pay, but who hare.'to maintain this class, should not rest jrntil the law Ims been amended to provide that the franchise shall not bo exorcised by anyone in receipt of pay from the State, either as salary, pension or relief. 1-To public company could carry on business economically or with profit ’ if it allowed its employees to control it, and dependents arc certainly not ’ entitled to control. The principle of universal suffrage is right—with certain limitations. If it should have'no limitations then there should ho a gaol delivery at every election, and the votes of the inmates of i mental hospitals should also bo taken. It should ho enacted that t when a man lias gained the fortunate position of receiving pay or aid from the public purse ho necessarily relinquishes an3 T right to dictate to bis employers or to interfere with their will.

IX the House on Friday last Mr Barclay gave voice to ideas which arc in some men’s minds, and which have considerably influenced some of our legislation. Expression of these ideas has been the aim of all the authors of Utopian schemes, and perhaps the most generally popular is that of Bellamy in his “Looking Backward,” and “Equality,” in the latter of which he dealt with most of the criticism of his former work. Mr Barclay gravely urged that the State should take the place of trusts and combines, producing at cheap rates and excluding the element oi profit. But the most injurious Trust of all at the present time is that of Labour, or rather of that portion of it employed in the parasitic industries, which can exist only by levying special tribute on all the people. If" Mr Barclay’s idea was put into practice, of course, that Trust would bo annihilated, because no State with sane managers would employ any of its people in making articles it could buy cheaper from others. It would buy from the others, and would set its own people to do useful and profitable work. Under present conditions, all the producers and all consumers are injured, because the parasitic industries prey on them. There might bo some argument in favour of Mr Barclay’s idea.if the State took over all the producing and distributing industries, as suggested by Bellamy, pooling the proceeds, ami distributing them equally to all—always provided that the lazy, drunken, and improvident could bo eliminated. But that is just whore the (rouble comes in when Utopian schemes are considered. They may be perfect schemes for‘perfect men and women, but the preponderance of imperfect ensures their failure, oven when tried under the most promising conditions. At the same time it should bo realised that many in this colony are being injured by the great advance which has been made towards giving ns all the possible evils of Bellamy’s scheme without any of its possible benefits or advantages. The Labour Trust has forced all the people to pay more for their supplies, the thriftless, lazy, improvident and criminal have to bo supported by the thrifty, and are not prevented from increasing their number. Under a proper social system the [useless and .dangerous would be eliminated in a generation or so, and those who would not do their fair share of work would be compelled to either do it or starve. We believe that the majority of Mr Barclay’s supporters in his electorate axe “protected” factory bands, and Sin.old note tint if the State 1 ■ ov r 1 ■ work of the law ori--s one of the first acts would to dose down the useless ones, so tliat all the people might obtain Cheaper supplies, thus lowering the cost of living and promoting the

WHAT may happen in a country where Ministers refuse to give Parliament full details relating to the public finances was indicated in tho House on Friday, when in reply to a .-juostion by Mr Davoy, the Minister

Customs was forced to admit Mr Shannon, the Ciiiof Customs ei t, has been receiving in addi-

viou to his salary of £9OO a year no less than' 80s per day as travelling expenses. These have been paid whether lie was travelling or not ever since his appointment in 1888. The Minister explained that though there was no written agreement the understanding was confirmed by letters from Sir Harry Atkinson and Mr Ballauca. and, later on the Commissioner of Customs said that the agreement was renewed by Hr Seddou in 1803. A number of members expressed themselves very strongly on the subject, and the Premier referred to the fact that the arrangement bad been made by men who have since died. The discussion served to show that the Ministerial beads of the Departments have little knowledge of their working, or are not exorcising that economy which is so desirable. The Premier suggested that in future the post-audit system should be adopted, and Mr Massey said this matter was above party and should ho considered by a. strong committee. Another echo of the past came from Mr Fisher, who said that the Vouchor Incident Commission made it perfectly clear that no system but the post-audit would be satisfactory. The fact that £535 a year can bo drawn in addition to salary shows the necessity for giving Parliament the fullest information relating to the public accounts. This may, or may not, bo an isolated case. Those who remember the conditions prevailing at the time when Sir Harry Atkinson was cutting down expenses to moot the deficit loft by the originators of the party now in office, will realise that ho did not intend the arrangement to be permanent, but preferred to cut down salary and pay a sufficient sum to cover travelling expenses. Sir Harry, however, did not long retain office, but his successors should have thoroughly examined all items of expenditure, and made more satisfactory arrangements. As admitted by members, no blame, can bo attached to the expert; it rests solely on those who have been entrusted with the management of tiro finances.

IT is satisfactory to note that the farmers are taking keen interest in opposing the application of the Arbitration Act to the agricultural industries. Wo believe • that the armors have at last received the impulse required to induce them to unite in self-defence, and that the ultimate results will bo that the Union will bo joined by every sensible farmer, and that it will develop into a body which will directly influence politics, and insist on adherence to its platform. The interests of the producers are far above thoso of any .political party, and if once they act with unity there is little doubt that they will secure all they desire, because they can send a majority to Parliament. The attack on agricultural interests will servo to weld the farmers into one political body which will place principles first and party politicians last.