The Daily News. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21. BRITAIN'S LOSS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 190, 21 November 1910, Page 4

The Daily News. MONDAY, NOVEMBER 21. BRITAIN'S LOSS.

It is an excellent feature of national life for the people to have self-esteem within reasonable limits. National selfesteem has led to the seizure cl the title of "God's Own Country" to three of them, and it has never yet been shown which of the three is best entitled to it. Sir Robert Stout, Chief Justice, is keenly conscious of the superlative qualities of New Zealand, and, like many other patriots, lie has noticed that the British press does not give that space to Xew Zealand news that New Zealand gives to British and Continental news. In a recent article the Chief Justice, taking a leading paper—the London Times—complains that during one month it published only 11 % inches of news relating to this country. Sir Robert is a man who is used to making comparisons and giving judgments on evidence adduced each day. British papers likewise make comparisons. Even in New Zealand, where news of importance is not "thick as autumnal leaves that strew the brooks in Vallombrosa," the constant trouble is, not to find matter to fill uj, but to discover what can be kept out. The London Times' viewpoint is probably that it does not cater for the few New Zealanders in London, that there are few New Zealanders anywhere, and that the things that happen in New Zealand are comparatively unimportant. To the British reader the events that occur in a community of one million souls—a population that, from an English standpoint, is not excessive for a mere town—New Zealand is a place almost out of his sphere of interest. The doings of the London County Council—a government that has infinitely more important work to effect that the 16 combined Parliaments of Australasia—are of greater moment than anything that happens on this side of the world, short of a war or a revolution. The London Times frequently prints two or three columns of condensed news, each item of which is more vital from the point of view of national or international interest than anything transpiring in Australasia in a month—each item, indeed, if its birthplace were Neiv Zealand would be "starred." It is illogical t© compare New Zealand news in point of view of importance with European news, but it is natural enough for New. Zealand and Australasian patriots to believe that the matters that affect us should interest the millions of Britain. In short, it is necessary for New Zealand papers to hear what is happening in the great world of action, but not at all essential that the great world should know all there is to read about us. In the matter of the news from Britain and elsewhere published by New Zealand papers—and Sir Robert appears to think it is very good of one million people to accept news that is agitating two or three hundred million souls—the quality is not superb. New Zealand does not reject an inch of the biassed twaddle that is sent over the cable, and it is evident that the more independent English papers reject with scorn anything sent from this end that is unimportant or colored. It is impossible that New Zealand can be regarded in the Old Countries as if it were Germany, France, Russia, Spain or Portugal. We can't become hoary and interesting as a country in sixty years or so. We have no international complications, wars or political events that can in any way affect the nations. We are engaged mostly not in making history but in growing food and clothing. In the view of the English newspaper reader, the occasional halfinch about New Zealand stocks in which English capital is invested, is of much more potent interest than a New Zealand judge's remarks at a capping ceremony, or the progress of Socialism, trades unionism, or Labor in politics. In the meantime, British papers will go on forgetting us as if our Chief Justice had not written his article of complaint. Shall New Zealand retaliate for this injustice by closing down on British and Continental news? The New Zealander who could read no oversea news would be "out of the world," but the Londoner who did not see the name of this ccmntry mentioned for a year would certainly not be detrimentally affected. New Zealand and the events happening in it are pf transcendant importance to us. This is right and proper, but for us to believe that the world is losing something by the fact that the London Times publishes only 11% inches of New Zealand news a month is absurd. And as a nation New Zealand does not protest, because she is sanely endeavoring to carry on her daily occupation, and has no time to worry over so small a matter. We in New Zealand greatly resent being lectured to on our real or supposed shortcomings, but it is likely that London and its papers will carry on without worrying in the least to increase the New Zealand news space because a patriot is piqued.