CURRENT TOPICS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 374, 27 April 1910, Page 4

CURRENT TOPICS

POOR AUCKLAND! Auckland has many grievances, and some of them are legitimate. A telegram published this morning tells us that the Auckland Government House is empty, the furniture sold, and even the telephone connection cut. It is consequently evident that the new Governor will have no place tt> lay his head when he attends the Avondale races or journeys thence to view Cornwall Park. Auckland is less sorry for the Governorelect "than for Auckland, but it is more angry with .Wellington than with anything or anybody else. Wellington has a brand-new Government House planted on the spot where once was a mental hospital. Tt is costing £20.000 to make, a road to it. Curiously, there seem to be 110 complaints from Dunedin or; Christchurch about lack of local Government Houses. Auckland's eternal .point is that the seat of Government should never have been removed from "last, loneliest, and loveliest," and it "annot get over it. Auckland cannot, liave everything. Tt has the Hii-.l fhenf. ■harbor in the world (Sydney 1. 'Kb 2, j Auckland 3, X-ples 4. Port' T,i ( „ :>':i 5,1 elc.). it has the large:) poj,u'.';'"> in I

I In l Dominion, j! has (lie t >v<-' ;mUikspirited citizens, it has the ?«•.:! Y.i rk-i, flie finest site, the l:" ,c ;t .-x-i-iic .-ind tile highest rateable value. ViVii't it let Wellington h'M'e Pie snt*(i")i nf ])o--crssin<r the only Government. fli.'u:-':! ;Vid. anyhow, why e'i'i't sawn- •.ve-.lfhv Atickloii.l livii do like 11 lVwrrslcm Ir- men offer (lie ire cf a »n:!nyj<>ii to 1.0 i,' Diekson-Poyn-'I""? Kvn if f.l> furu"t;:-lias been nolfl ae I f'wi (i-lcuhnr.c ej:( ~(T. Aneklnnd will w' die. and , i'. ■ ,|,l will •;>) i<n >,;■ ■ i;..;' rn.tr .i, ! lin, •. COY/-:. 1111 Hi : : (])<. V' .iiiii iiilius v,-on'f ihnt ilowi, -nc! (lie 1 Vriifl a ,io| li'<cl" /•> ! r ■ . v-.». v vu o Lli, iu vubvc Up.

BEATING THE A 111. The Central School Committee really should not be angry with the Education, Jiounl, and it is hoped that tlie Board will not be angry with the Central School Committee, Talking per report "at" a Board is much less eil'cotive than talking • to' !1 Board in the Boardroom. To be quite frank, it is the fault of New Plymouth that there is 710 representative ol this town on the Board, and if committees do not take the necessary interest in .sending a 'lighting man to look auer local surely they are to 'blame, j It is all very well to be sarcastic ut the expense of the Department ajiout j education " supposed to be paid for by tin-. State," but it is to be remembered | that the education system 01 New ZeaI land is enormously expensive, and that towns desiring to get their adequate share of the "loaves and fishes" must remain wide enough awake to have representatives 011 the Boards. If local schools are dissatisfied with the Board of Education, it is obvious that the Board wants [ mending, and if local committees nave ideas of running schools and apportionmonies, they should certainly tell a live representative and make a Hoard ! member of him. I THAT BRIDGE.

The deputation that waited upon the Borough Council last evening drew from the Mayor the declaration that the Council intended to construct the Pow-derhnm-street bridge the full width of the street, and a repudiation of the belief that had gained considerable currency that the Council was bent on reducing the cost of the work for the purpose of utilising the surplus money towards the cost of the Gill-street bridge. The petitioners and deputation achieved their object. True, in his explanation of the position his Worship did not make himself very clear regarding the Council's present intentions in respect to the width of the bridge, but his subsequent statement, in reply to Mr. Goodacre, left no room for misunderstanding. Councillors Bellringer and Wilson were not so luminous. The former said the expenditure of an additional £2OO or £3OO was out of the question, -but no one advises the incurring of this liability, the common belief -being that the retaining walls and the filling-in can easily be done out of the money available, notwithstanding the unexpected heavy cost of the foundations. Councillor Wilson stated that one retaining wall could not be erected without the other. Few will dispute this obvious ifact. He also said the Railway Department was the stumblingblock on account of its not giving the necessary easement. If retaining walls are to be erected, why trouble about obtaining easements from any propertyowners? The walls would be erected within the. Council's own boundary, and therefore it would be quite unnecessary to consult anyone, except, perhaps, to ask owners benefiting by the walls for contributions towards the cost. One owner has already intimated his willingness to do this, and very likely the others would do the same. But even if no assistance were forthcoming from this source, it would be better and cheaper to erect the walls than to carry out. tile culvert the 'additional 30ft on cither side to take the batter. The foundations alone, on the. Mayor's showing, would cost about £SOO, whereas the retaining walls would cost very little more, it would have been more satisfactory had the Mayor given the deputation, and the public, more information than ho vouchsafed' in regard to the plans to be followed—whether the retaining walls are to be built or the culvert to be lengthened as originally provided—but his frank avowal that the bridge will ue the full width of the street, and not limited to 22ft, will at once allay the apprehension that prevailed over the matter and give general satisfaction. Mr. Tisch is nothing if he is not a man of his word, and we feel sure ho will carry out his promise or statement to the very letter.

ME. REEVES ON ARBITRATION. The Hon. W. P. Reeves, in his capacity of director of the London School of Economics, delivered a lecture last month on the subject of "Colonial State Tribunals for the Regulation of Conditions of Labor." He dealt to a largo extent with the New Zealand law. The most difficult and exasperating question which the Arbitration Court in the Dominion had to face, he said, was the demand of the trade unions that free labor should be excluded altogether from employment. It so happened that in the first case dealt with by the Court the problem had figured prominently. The Court lvas settled •it by "giving the unionists in effect what they

wanted, but without absolutely excluding non-union labor. "While declining to say that non-union labor should not be employed," added Mr. Reeves, "the Court said it should only be employed where competent and suitable unionist labor could not be obtained. That, of course, at once raised the question of how far the unions were to be exclusive. The Court settled that where the unionists had this preference the Court must satisfy itself that the rules were reasonable, that the entrance fee was low, and that the union was not discriminating against applicants. They must also keep an employment book, containing a list of out-of-work members, to which all employers must have access." The preference to unionists had been the subject of much embittered controversy both in Xew Zealand and Australia. It had been granted bv the Arbitration Court in Xew Smith Wales, but the Arbitration Court in Western Australia had been specifically denied the power of granting it. When tile Federal Parliament discussed the passing of an Arbitration Act. the Bill had been blocked for two or three years because of the strong objection to giving the Court this power. The Court might now, however, grant the preference, but must not give it to any union of a "political'' nature. Mr. Reeve* drew attention to the nirbir'iMi; '-li.rrHer of the Xew Zeabwl Aci ( umpir: i! with the narrower ::''o,')e of Ihe \ i:-" nri;i n Wages Board j-'lieiiH- aml the 'irili-b Trade Boards Act. '!r:s urn'- s 'em to have expressed his- v!i' v on tli ■ more repent, amendT ne;:!'a «!•••>! ralion law of this HHiutiv. !;■: lo 1; ve dealt rather with lite p.- as it exi-ted ten years