THE SECOND DIVISION

Dominion, Volume 10, Issue 3140, 19 July 1917, Page 6

THE SECOND DIVISION

ITS CLAIMS TO CONSIDERATION. Sir—Your correspondent "Thirty-six," in his letter published in to-days 'jJosiixrox, shows a. want of manly consideration and dutv to his belovod wifo and family, that is if he has a family, also a full- knowledge of his responsibilities, and ordinary courtesy towards those who nre striving to do their duty to the Slate and to those dependant upon their breadwinners. Sir, if your correspondent had had the decency to sign his lull uiuim and address to his curt and uisleading letter, we could take him seriously, but such correspondents should not 'be taken seriously. Is Mr. Armstrong (Second DivisionLeague) not doing a national work for the good of tho wives and dependants? Is it not the duty of wives to complain if they arc not satisfied with the splendid work being done by the Second Division liCague? Is it not a fact that the Government has practically admitted tliat what the league asks for is necessary? la it not thought by tho thousands of

men and women throughout the Dominion who have joined the league that the Second Division League is necessary? Otherwise would they join? Has not tho cost of living gone up leaps and bounds since the Alain Body went away, this necessitating more revenue to keep she home going? Is their any necessity why the dependants of soldiers should not be properly provided for whether tho soldiers belonged to tho Second or First Division? Is it a crime for us fathers to endeavour to leave our families properly provided for? If "Thirty-six" is so keen to bo in the firing line and leave his family, vhy has he not volunteered ere this? Is'it a manly action to cast insinuations at Air. Armstrong under a nom de plume"? Does "Thirty-six" understand the reason why the Second Division League was formed, and is he aware of the terrific growth of the Second Division League throughout New Zealand? Which is best, to prevent poverty before wo are called upon to fight, or wait until we are out of thto country and then endeavour to rectify matters, after our families have discovered that they cannot feed ,the kiddies on ninepence a day ? AVill five x shillings per day and ninenence for the children feed and clothe them, and pay lodge fees and insurances anl schooling, and rent, baker, butcher, grocer, milkman, etc.? Because France and tho . other countries are compelled to suffer ■ agony, is that any reason why we in this Dominion (a self-supporting Dominion) should not provide for those left behind? Sir, because we are trying to get better conditions for our wives, is it to be supposed that we sx& not ready to fight When called upon? Did the wife and family of vour correspondent approve of the' letter that "Thirty-six" wrote to you, Sir? I guess not. Is "Thirty-six" able to leave his ■wife'-well provided for—probably out of a large remuneration? Could lie honestly admit that his wife and family could live decently on the money/1 have above referred to, 'lamely, five shillings per day and ninepence per day for each youngster? Will "Thirtysix" meet the Second Division Leagiio (I suggest tne man representing the league and your correspondent) and have a debate upon the subject, and perhaps "Thirty-six" would feel somewhat disgusted that he had cast insinuations at Jlr. Armstrong? I have not attended a 6ingle league meeting. My work takes me out of town, but. I would like to meet your correspondent face to face, and tell him what I consider is his duty to his wife and dear children?—l am," etc., , E. L. JONES. Wellington, July 18. i [We have received other letters coached in somewhat similar terms which space limitations prevent us publishing.]