WELLINGTON TOPICS.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 June 1916, Page 2

WELLINGTON TOPICS.

MILITARY SERVICE. STONE-WALLING. (From Our Own Correspondent). Wellington, June 7. Stone-walling as a fine art has fallen far from grace since Mr. Seddon with a little band of sturdy Liberals at his back held up the Representation Bill of 1881 for forty-eight hours on end and succumbed at last only to sheer physical exhaustion. At that time the .standing orders were much more elastic than they are to-day, and the men who stood in the breach in defence of the popular rights against what they conceived to be the inroads of conservatism were able to use any material they pleased in hampering the progress of the legislative machine. One of the foremost figures in this historic fight delivered a highly technical address on the fauna and flora of the country, another discoursed fluently upon apiaries and foul-brood among bees and Mr. Seddon himself, taking the electoral roll of the district as his inspiration, talked unceasingly in alphabetical order of the personal qualities of his constituents. There were several other notable stone-walls before a drastic revision of the standing orders ten years later placed well-defined limits upon the "privileges" of members, but none of them was so well organised nor so long maintained as the one in which the future great Liberal leader was the moving spirit. To-day stone-walls at their best or at their worst, according to the point of view, are only passing incidents in the parliamentary game. OBSTRUCTING BUSINESS. The opposition set up by the majority of the Labor Party to the passage of the Military Service Bill through committee can hardly be dignified by the title of ''stone-wall." Mr. Payne, Mr. Coombs and Mr. Webb are doubtless just as sincere in their conviction that compulsory service is undesirable as Mr. Seddon and his colleagues were in theirs that a readjustment of representation was unjust, but they are not confronted by the same domineering majority as the obstructionists of thirty-five years ago were. It must be said for the Prime Minister and the Minister of ftefence, whatever their faults of manner and method may have oeen on other necas!ons, that in submitting the Military Service Bill to the-House they displayed a spirit of sweet reasonableness which should have saved them from factious opposition. Both Mr. Massey and Mr. Allen have stated explicitly more than once that they want the Bill to represent as far as humanly possible the views of the whole House. Speaking /ast night the Minister of Defence said 1 e did not imagine for a moment th* measure was absolutely perfect and he would gladly welcome suggestions made in good faith with a view to improving its details. Mr. Massey in a spirited appeal to the Labor members to desist from wanton obstruction spoke to a similar effect. But Mr. Combs, Mr. Payne and Mr. Webb were obdurate and while claiming to be as much concerned for the welfare of the Empire as Ministers themselves were refused to budge by a single turn of a word of a phrase from the position they had taken up Mr. Hindmarsh and Mr. Walkei maintained an equally firm but a more conciliatory attitude, and Mr. Veiteh, of course, had given his adhesion to compulsion with certain reservations in respect to its application. COST OF LIVING.' Mr. T. W. Rhodes, the member for Thames, whose constituents probably are much interested in the cost of living as other people are, wants Mr. Massey in his capacity of Minister of Industries and Commerce to tell the House something about'the doings of the Board of Trade. He » particularly anxious to learn if the Board has yet submitted a report to the Government on any of the problems it has investigated and if it has made any practical suggestions the Government is likely to adopt. Of | course, the Minister will take his own time to satisfy Mr. Rhodes' curiosity, which is shared by a good many other members of the House, and meanwhile the grumbling concerning the cost of living will continue. Tt is known that the Board made a very thorough enquiry into the wheat and flour and bread questions during the visit it paid to Cante*. bury some six or seven weeks ago, and >t is reasonable to assume it submitted a report to the Minister on its return to Wellington. Obviously the members of the Board can give no'information on this point, but witnesses who appeared before them are not under the same, restraint and some of thesj' appear to have been talking rather freely. One of them with wide experience and expert knowledge of the subject says the Board must recommend a reduction in the price of both bread and flour and that the Minister, in view of the evidence, cannot fail to give effect to the recommendation. Just why there has been so much delay in dealing with the matter no one seems to know, hut people acquainted with its personnel refuse to oelieve the blame should rest upon the Board.

AGE OF SOLDIERS. Arising out of the Military Service Bill there was quite an animated discussion in the House last night on the age of soldiers. The age limits provided in the Bill are twenty at' one end and forty-five at the other, but Mr. Comb., urged that boys of twenty should not be sent to the front and that many ine.i over forty-five were better fitted to bear such an experience. The Minister of Defence stated that lie had been abvised by the responsible officers that young men of twenty, who probably would receive nearly a year's training before they reached the trenches, would be well able to bear any strain that might be placed upon them. They were quicker than older men would be in learning what the soldier had to learn and they had proved themselves in every way reliable. In the past some young fellows had got into the Reinforcements under the prescribed age by misleading the authorities, but this would be prevented as far as possible in future by demanding certificates in all doubtful cases. The discussion proceeded on perfectly legitimate lines, except for occasional extravagances from the back bpnehes, and proposals to raise the limits to twenty-one years and fifty-five years were supported by nine or ten Liberal members, some of whom doubtless saw opportunities for themselves in opening the door wider at rheir own end. Both the proposals were ultimately rejected by large majorities, but the fact that the Minister of Justice supported the one that would have brought him within the operation of the compulsory clauses of the Bill shows the Government was perfectly sincere in inviting the assistance of members in Improving the measure.