CURRENT TOPICS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 308, 23 May 1911, Page 4

CURRENT TOPICS.

"PEACE VERSUS WAR." We published in yesterday's issue a letter irom a correspondent signing himself "Peace and Progress." He protested at the articles appearing in this paper "against international peace." We are sadly afraid the gentleman either die. not read the articles thoroughly or wu> unable lo grasp the ideas we tried to convey, hi our articles "against" international peace, we have very plainly stated our belief that the prospects for such a glorious consummation arc brighter than ever before in the world's history. Our correspondent merely repeats what we have tried to tell him in respect to the wide movement in Germany towards this splendid end. We have shown that there is an earnest desire on the part of British statesmen and people to make war impossible. In our "advocacy of war" we have commented gratefully on the Anglo-United States Agreement, have welcomed the Arbitration proposals, have shown by quotations from famous Germans, how very wide the wish for peace is in om cousins' country, and have, in short, advocated to the best of our ability the very means our correspondent alleges we are lighting. It is hardly worth while replying to the strictures of "irresponsible editors." Even if an obscure writer in an obscure country raged in a demand for war, war could not come because of him. But if an obscure writer in an obscure place counsels manly preparation against attack as the present available means of preventing war. surely he has some little right to his opinion. We took the liberty in one of' tho-e articles ''against international peace" of saying almost exactly what our correspondent says as an argument against us, that the people (he mentioned "ninetenths") hated war. But we have also taken the liberty to point out that our potential enemies cannot be kept from attacking us by the simple process of sitting still and twirling' our thumbs. To interpret this as a bloodthirsty and irresponsible desire to set the nations at each others throats is ridiculous. If bur correspondent is interested in our opinions regarding this great question merely from the point of view of enmity to them, he might with others do us the justice of carefully finding out by reading what our opinions really are. In the articles which he has entirely misread Le will find those opinions.

LOSS BY FIIiE. We have frequently commented on the fact that there are more fires (destruction nf property) in New Zealand Hum m any other country in tint world, due largely to the "flue" kind of weatlierhoanl dwelling, the inllammaliility of liuildiiin-s. and to an occasional disposition to "make a rise." Tn reply to a correspondent the New Zealand' Times supplies some official figures that are illuminating:—The insurance loss llivoueliout the Do'iiinion for the year ending December 31st, 1909, amounted to £488,530

or £.51,050 in excess of the average loss for the previous five years. In his last report Fire Inspector Hugo remarks: "Adding 33% per cent, to the insurance loss, for the purpose of arriving ul the approximate fire waste for the year, brings the amount to £024,707, or £(v.S,OG7 in excess of the average for the previous live years. Taking the population of New Zealand proper as numbering one million, the average loss per head for I'M) was 12s '(id, an increase of nearly (IVjjd per capita." Insurance experts estimate that the loss of property per capita by fire in New Zealand is the highest in the world. It is noteworthy that the annual fire loss of the United States is equal to that of any other six civilised nations. So far as our correspondent's first question is concerned, the lire loss in Wellington city in 1000-10 was £50,851, or 13.15 per cent, of the value of the property affected, £370,5110. In 1904-5 the fire loss in the city was .C11'.1,437, of which one (ire, that at the D.1.C... accounted for £04.1>50; 1903-4 fire loss. £47,757 (Kempthorne, Prosser & Co., £37,050). The fire loss for 11)00-7, the year of the disastrous fire on Lanibton Quay, is not available. As to our correspondent's last question, there is no ollkial record of the number of deaths directly caused through fires, though it may he of interest to know that in 1000, the latest figures to which reference can be made, the number of deaths in the Dominion attributed to ''burns and scalds" was 55—30 males and 25 females.