The Daily News. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1919. SOME WILD IDEAS.

Taranaki Daily News, 9 December 1919, Page 4

The Daily News. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1919. SOME WILD IDEAS.

Those who read Mr. Fitzherbert's speech, delivered at Hawera on Friday last, may be pardoned if they recall some of the incidents of the French Commune, or Russian Socialism. It is not surprising to find that if Official Labor controlled the Dominion, the country would be given over to an unlimited consumption of liquor, gambling, and horse-racing; the' capitalist would be abolished, and I the worker supplied by the State with all the money he requii es. In his anxiety to attract support for the extreme Labor Party, Mr. Fitzherbert holds out the promise | of land for everyone, acquired with State funds, no second mortgage and no power of disturbance

of the mortgagor in ease of default. A man one? in possession of a house or land is to be entitled to remaiD there, and, by inference, repudiate his obligations. He would even go a step further and allow a share-milker to claim the farm whereon he worked—confiscate it from the owner, leaving the State to pay compensation. A moment's reflection would have shown the candidate the folly of such a proposal, which would destroy one of the main avenues whereby the -workers have gradually acquired both land and stock as the result of their labor. No farmer would in such case employ share-milkers, so that the workers would be much worse off than before. To couple the late Mr. Bichard Seddon's name with communistic doctrines shows the audacity of official Labor. Equally revolutionary is the suggestion that small farmers should be free of taxation, especially in view of the fact that what the country urgently needs is a large proportion of small farmers, and if these are not ■to pay their share of taxation, it would be an outrage on the rest of the community, and a disregard of all justice. The whole foundation of the policy outlined by Mr. Fitzherbert is based on the State paying for the workers' needs; in other words, that the workers shall be a class by themselves, having the right to impose on the rest of the community the duty of financing the workers, without receiving anything in return except defiance. Much as the public are averse to "go-slow" tactics, they may be expected! to make haste very slowly in supporting such proposals. If the workers are to be fully financed by the State, then there must be a State bank, possessing unlimited capital, but the peculiarity about the candidate's remarks on this subject is that the people's money is to go into it. But what is to be done with the money in the Bank? Where is all the money to come from to supply Labor's needs? The whole of this political programme of Labor is one calculated to foster unrestricted improvidence. Not one word was said as to Labor's duty towards the State and its people. Evidently there are to be but two sections of the community—those who have ideals (the workers), and those who make sacrifices (the rest of the people). The doctrine of equality and fraternity naturally finds a place in the programme, supplemented by an appeal for the exhibition of a little more Christianity by the "children of the nation"— presumably those outside the charmed circle of official, or extreme, Labor. The essence of Christianity is that a man should do unto his neighbor that which his neighbor should do to him. We commend this strongly to the* direct actionists. Fortunately, no sane person need take Mr. Fitzherbert's remarks seriously. The seasoning may suit the palate of the irreeoneilables, but ordinary mortals may be excused for preferring their parliamentary food less pretentious and more suited to the body politic. The Labor that Mr. Fitzherbert champions does not, he says, stand, for percentages. That is self-evident; it stands for eating the cake and having it as well—no matter who else starves. The whole business is too ridiculous for words.