LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 934, 29 September 1910, Page 7

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

RE duplication; of street NAMES. Sir,—ls the street-naming, qu'ostibn to be shelved' again indefinitely! 1 If tlio City Council had dono its duty iu tlio. past it would nover have allowed duplication of street na.ines to begin to exist. Olio, of tlio worst examples is Vogeltown in this matter. Can anyono conceive of anything more idiotic' than tho naming of practically all its. streets after city streets, thus, creating , duplication on a wholesale scaiq. Was. thero a 'faminein names in thoso days, "when Voyeltown's streets were named? A now 'laiuui Terrace is being developed at. Lyall Bay, in. spite of , tho existonco of an old ,'i'ainui Terraco off Tasmau Street. : A Jackson Street is ,also\ being built upon at Island Hay; wliilo another, exists at Brooklj-n. Thero are,.of.course, the pairs of Edward Streets, Shannon Streets, etc., and .others, too numerous to mention; but the, choicest, gem. of the lot is the pair of .Tames Streets in liilbirnic. The person: or persons responsible for this' absurdity in a comparatively small part of Wellington ought not to bo allowed at iarge. A long collection of streets bear tho name Victoria or Crawford ,(not counting those , in'; Ivarori and other districts) ; this is'equally absurd. The only, objections -that can arise in ending' this muddle are our old' friends "vested interests/' that block-;the :way :to necessary, reform : all the world, ovor. I suppose they; have • arisen—licnce tho delay in rectifying matters.—l am, etc., H. W. PHILLIPS. THE COLONIAL SUGAR REFINING COMPANY, LTD. . i 1 PitlCE OF SUGAK. ■ Sir,—lt has been, asserted so frequently of late, : both' in' Parliament . and'; the; press, that .the public liavo derived 110 benefit .from the : removal of tho Customs duty . on. sugar that it, is . thought desirable to publish the .following facts ' On October 31, 1907,. the price, of our, standard refined; sugar was JJ2O per :■ ton, duty paid, in .Auckland,- the duty '.being £i 13s. 4d. per .ton. / ' " .On November 1,. 1907, the duty was abolished, and, our; price was; lowered ..to i!ls per ton. ' .; ; ' .- ; . Since then our. ; prices;have advanced, in, sympathy with a gradual upward movement in the world's markets, to the'extentof £2 10s. .per 'ton; but they would have been ,£4 13s. .M.'.per'ton higher still;had, tho duty , been maintained. .; i . It does not seem to bo generally known that the sugar which we imported for use in our .refinery/before November 1, .1907, was subject to the sarnie rate' of duty when leaving:, the refinery .'as. other , imported sugars, and that/ consequently, when the duty, was .abolished our prices were. re- : duccd to at least the. same extent. ,■ I mij»ht add that, ias against tho present price: of, our": standard sugar, in New Zealand, iless, bonus 10s.; J!17;10s. per; ton,' the: quotations .are..(the':duty-.being : ,£1 16s.- Bd. 'per ton), London, 320 10s. per. ton; Sydney; (the! duty being:iEG.per ton), : i823 per.ton.-—I am, etc.,-. ;;W. J. W. PIIILSON, . r.'/i.; . / Manager. , Auckland,, September IG, 1910.