I he Kevlew ot Keviews. 



July, 1912. 



that was roming over the face of affair^. X<;\v tlie 

 matter is forcing itself upon public mm. Even Mr. 

 Fi.sher realises that it is becoming insistent, and 

 that at no very distant date Australia will have to 

 ask for a larger share in the disposition of affairs 

 in the* Pacific. The Home Government ha.s made 

 scxeral bhiiKkTS. through not looking far enough 

 into the future to .see the way in which British 

 interests would be involved in days to come by their 

 fri'e-and-easv wav of dealing with Pacific intere.srs. 

 The Xew Hebrides group is a ca.se in point. The 

 ("ondnminium is a failure. Joint control means, in 

 this case, l(X)se control and disgraceful administra- 

 tion. The only way of settling the difficulty is the 

 retirement of one of the yinwers. and, as the islands 

 are geographically part of the world naturally fall- 

 ing to the care of Australia and New Zealand, 

 and British interests preponderate there and all 

 around, it ought to be possible, with adequate com- 

 pensation, to bring the islands entirely under British 

 control. Then New Zealand might very well under- 

 take the work of governance, Australia lieing repre- 

 .sented. In this, and in some other ways outside their 

 own ])urely domestic affairs, Au.stralia and Xew 

 /eahmd might well unite. But political union ! 

 That will ne\fr 1h'. 



'' Labour, as we know it now, is in- 

 Work a ,l,.,.,l a drudgery." So Mr. Fisher 

 Drudgery, ;^ rei)orted to have said, as 



a comment on one section of the 

 Labour Party to seek a six-hours' day of 

 work. And this in the sunnie.st country in 

 the world, with the best wages al.so, and 

 the best conditions for working. But Mr, i^'isher 

 quite uncon.sciou.sly ))Ut.s his linger on the weak spot 

 in I.al)our arguments and ideals. If work is a 

 drudgery in Australia, then it is so Itecause the work- 

 ing man is lazy and discontented, a (;harge which 

 we arc jealous he should l)e shielded from. But, 

 from a Labour point of view, work is a drudgery. 

 And, becau.se that is so, the Lalxfur movement, as 

 represi-nted by blatant unionism, is l>ound to fail. 

 It does not recognise the dignity of work, the neces- 

 sity for it, and a fair amount of it, to keej) .society 

 sweet and the individual fit. I well rememlx'r how 

 on one occasion on the platform a voice from the 

 audience asked me if I ajiproved of the idea of a 

 four-hour day for workers. I re])lied that I did not 

 so approve ; that work, ajiart from its necessity as a 

 means of e.irning subsistence, was one of the' most 

 I'N-s.sed things in the world, dwelt upon the dignity 

 of it, and what .1 menace to the nation a half- 

 employed people would Ije. " Boo-hoo ! boo-hool" 

 yelled a part of the audience, to whom physical 

 exercise of any kind was a sign of degradation. And 

 Mr. Fisher seems to share the view. Drudgery can 

 Iw^ with the best of conditions, because it is rnostlv 

 a matter of mental and moral outlook. If ultimate 

 idleiu'ss be ihe SociaJist's objective, the end is not 

 dirticult to prophesy. 



There has been a lightning change 

 Tasmanian in Tasmanian politics. At a meet- 

 Government. i„g of the Liberal Party, after the 



elections, the members signified their 

 desire for a change in leadership, and Sir Elliot 

 Lewis was displaced, to give room to Mr. Solomon. 

 It is not to be wondeix'd at that there was dissatis- 

 faction at Sir Elliot Lewis's leadership. To say 

 it was colourless is to be merciful ; but let it go at 

 that. Tasmania has suffered from a stagnation of 

 political blood, and it will take a lot of shaking up 

 to make it move a little more quickly. Mr. Solomon 

 should be strong enough to make a good .showing, 

 and the more determineiJ and aggressive h.e is the 

 more chances he has of brilliant success. The prob- 

 lem he has to tackle can only be solved by forcing 

 the situation and putting the hide-lx)und conser- 

 vatism that is in his party between the devil and the 

 deep sea. If he tempori.ses with it, he is lost. It 

 is quite within the range of possibility that a policy 

 of this kind would force an election ; but that would 

 not be an unmixed e\-\\. In the circumstances, 

 it would give him a bigger and better following, and 

 most likely result in the old con.servative element 

 l>eing cleared out. ^^"e congratulate Mr. Solomon, 

 who is still a young man, on his elevation to the 

 Premiership, and look forward to his tackling the 

 evil of Tattersall's, which is Tasmania's greatest 

 curse and hindrance, and removing it for ever. His 

 cr>]le;igues are — Mr. Paviie, Treasurer and Minister 

 of .Agriculture and Raihvay.s; Mr. Mulcahy, Minis- 

 ter for Lands, Works, and Mines; Dr. Butler, Chief 

 .Secretary ; Mr. C. Rus.sen, Honorary Minister. 



There has just been concluded a 

 law case in Melbourne that has at- 

 tracted widespread attention, and 

 caused huge indignation. Some 

 considerable time ago there was a scandal abroad 

 concerning Archdeacon X^ash, of the Church of 

 England. The .story of that is fresh in everyone's 

 mind. A little later a writ was is.sued by Arch- 

 bishop Clarke, of Melbourne, against John Norton, 

 the proprietor of " Truth." who had published an 

 article reflecting on .Archbishop Clarke in his con- 

 nection with Archdeacon Xash. ;^5ooo was claimed. 

 'I"he case came on during the month. After his 

 counsel's opening address. Archbishop Clarke went 

 into the box. and most minute statements were made 

 by him concerning Archde.acon Nash's alleged mis- 

 conduct. Statements of the most damaging kind 

 were made. Of course e\'eryone believed that 

 .Archdeacon Nash would have an opportunity of re- 

 \iewing the statements made from the witness-box, 

 and, indeed. .Archdeacon Nash attended court for 

 that purpose. Hut as soon as .Archbi.shop Clarke 

 had made his statement, the public was horrified by 

 the announcement that he had accepted a settlement 

 of the case for _;^iooo. This meant that .Archdeacon 

 Nash was robbed of the opportunity he would other- 

 \vise have had to give his side of matters. A note 



Th« Nash 

 Case. 



