TOPICAL READING.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXIX, Issue 8305, 7 December 1906, Page 4

TOPICAL READING.

The revival of the agitation againdt the insanitary practice of kissing the Bible in taking the oath, leads a London writer to remark that England is the only uountry in which this method is in use. Nor is the practice ancient. No mention is made of it in the "Book of Oaths," published in 1689. Lord Ooke, in his "institutes," says that witnesses touuh the Bible when taking the oath. The pruotioe o? kissing the Bible became general towards the close of the 18th century, and it is suggested that this was due to the great efforts made by Bible Societies to spread the Scriptures through the country. Since the Oaths Act of 1888 permitted anyone in England to take the Sootch oath without being questioned as to his religious belief, the usb of this system has steadily inoreased. It is not difijault to understand tbia for the form in* volves no risk of infection, aud is extremely solemn. The witness raises his hand high above his bead and says "I swear by Almighty God (as I shall answer to God at the great Day of Judgment) I will speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothiug but that truth." In Prance, Austria and Belgium the oath is taken in a manner similar to the Soofcch fashion, in Spain and Italy the witness swears on the Bible, while in Germany the oath has been entirely abolished.

The argument of intelligent Maoris against tbu Government's native land legislation is that each Maori sbould be given an opportunity to get individual possession of a piece of land and to cultivate it. I'he natives are at present unable to use their land because each bloek has many owners. This is the view upheld by the Maori Rights' Conservation Association of Auckland. Recently the secretary of this Jody stated:—."lhere is abundant «videnoe at hand to satisfy the enquirer that when the Maori is hinuself settled on a homestead of sufficient acreage of his own land, and has extended to hits the Parliamentary representation., which his status as a British subjeofc entiles hi*n to, he is quite willing—.under advice—to place his surplus lands at ooce upon the market. Why, then, will not the Government first settle the Maori on his own homestead before passing confiscatory legislation to dlspus3oss him of any, and perhaps eventually all, of his lands Alas! for the delusion which believes that native lands leased for 50 or 60 years to the pafeeba will ever again return the original owner."

l'ho movement in favour of creasing the amount of compensation already .afforded to Injured workers, and facilitating its recovery has been steadily gathering strength for some time past at Home. Last year an Amending 1)111, introduced into the House of Commons by Lord Belpher, and supported by the Unionists, would have considerably extended the aoope of the original Aut, and would have given the injured worker a better opportunity of securing oompunsation, Bug it was opposed by the and Labour members as inadequate, and it was accordingly dropped. The bill brought dona this year includes most of the provisions contained in a measure drafted last year by Mr Shaokelton the well-known Labour leader, The Labour Bill would have prevented any employer from setting up "contributory negligence" on the part of the workman as a defence ngainst a claim for compensation; i 1: would have increased considerably the maximum amount that uould be claimed for total or partial incapacity resulting from accident; and it would have allowed claims > made within six months of the ooonrrence of the accident ur time of death. Mr H. Gladstone, Secretary of S<.ate, Home Department, seems to have adopted most of the proposals suggested by Mr Shackeitou; and the Liberaltand Labour majority will be quite sufficient to ensure the passage of the Bill, unless the claims of the Labour party become too insistent and aggressive for the moderate Liberals to endure.

Ike debate in the Canadian Parliament on the Address-in-Reply has produoed perhaps the strongest and most ominous language that has ever bnen employed m a colonial public assembly &inoe the days of the Stamp Aot aud the "Boston tea-party." Dealing with the "modus vivendi" concluded recently between England aud the United States as tu the Newfoundland fisheries, the Leader of the Opposi tion openly declared that suoh action as the Imperial Government has taken tends directly toward the disintegration of the Empire. It was impossible, ' said the speaker, for the Empire to hold together unless the tlome Government refrained from unnecessary interference with colonial affairs, and admitted the colonial claim to looal self-government The Secretary of State, as in duty bound, replied in defence of the Imperial authorities. But in Canada the feeling that Newfoundland has again been sacrificed to England's diplomatio convenience is'intensely strong.