THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1880.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1867, 17 February 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 17, 1880.

The remarks of the Mayor with regard to tho letter he had received from the Lord Mayor of London respecting the collection of subscriptions for the Rowland Hill memorial seem to have been quite to tho point. It has boon proposed in England to found an institution for decayed postal servants in memory of the great founder of tho Penny Postage system, and tho colonies have been asked to aid in tho work. It seems, however, that tho form the memorial is to take almost precludes us from taking any active part in tho matter. No doubt if some large national monument were to have been erected, those people who hold in due appreciation the efforts of the late postal reformer would have put their hands into their pockets in order to add to its magnificence, and it almost appears anomalous that when a useful institution has taken the place of a monument that the claims of tho undertaking on us should bo loss pressing. Yet such we think is the case, and for the simple reason that if money is to be spent in the direction of keeping decayed postal servants it should, as tho Mayor remarked, go towards a benevolent fund for our own postal servants, whether that fund wore called the Rowland Hill Fund or whether it went by an other name. It is unfortunate that the request should have been made by the Lord Mayor of London in the form in which it has come, because it places the residents in this colony in a dilemma. If they do not subscribe they lay thorn! selves open to the imputation of being unmindful of tho memory of the great man who did so much for his fellow-men in the face of groat odds. If they do subscribe they inflict an evident wrong on their own postal servants, who naturally have the first claim on their sympathies. The only way out of this dilemma would apparently he to lay onr views on the subject candidly before the Lord Mayor. But perhaps it would be well, in any such explanation, to carefully avoid branching off in any way into the general question of the organisation of our civil service. The contemplation for ever so short a time of the wonderful want of system that reigns in what is facetiously termed our civil service, might spoil tho mayoral digestion for many a future feast, and as the present Lord Mayor of London is credited with being a very popular man, and quite the right man in the right place, it would hardly do to play practical jokes on his nervous system.

The controversy respecting the right of bathing in the rivers Hoathcote and Avon rages fiercely in the papers, and at intervals individuals are haled before the authorities accused of bathing within view of a public place within prohibited hours. There are two very distinct sides to this question. There is the side of the individual who delights in cold water and the exercise of swimming. Much as certain old philosophers use to gravely declare that the effects of sea sickness was not merely to relievo the stomach of superfluous bile but to cleanse to a certain extent the soul of the impurities that might bo clinging to it, so these gentlemen appear to hold that total immersion is the cure for all bodily and numerous mental infirmities. Then, on the other hand, there is the side of the individual who looks upon a river only as an ornamental piece of water, granted by Providence solely for the purpose of a “thing of beauty” alongside of which he and his family may stroll, contemplating the shadows of the rushes in the water and artistic and msthotic subjects in general. As in most cases where much can be said on both sides, either party can make out an excellent case, and the truth lies somewhere between the two extreme views. As to the healthiness of bathing, and the excellent effect it has on the physique, and we might almost say the morale of individuals, there can be no doubt. It braces the system, gives hardihood, and has in all ages been recognised as a valuable therapeutic assistant. On the other hand, it is self-evident that people enjoying the luxury of a swim should not be allowed to make themselves a nuisance to those who wish to enjoy the river in another way, and more particularly should bo kept totally out of sight of any houses that may bo built on or near the banks. In point of fact, local authorities have boon extremely backward in grappling with the whole subject. It is almost incredible that a notice should have boon left posted on the bank of Avon up to within a few days ago, informing bathers that they might bathe any time except between the

hours of 2 and 6 p.m., and all the while the police wore prosecuting for bathing between the hours of 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. This is only a sample of tho lax manner in which the subject has boon treated. The feeling of antagonism between bathers and local authorities is not logical. The latter, being placed to a certain extent in charge of tho health of these in their respective districts, should by all means encourage a health giving exercise, if they can do so without outraging the feelings of other sections of the community. It surely is not so difficult to devise means by which bathers might be screened from view, and any money spent in that direction would be well spent. Prosecute by all means those who outrage in tho smallest extent public decency, but give those who wish it an opportunity of enjoying the river in their own way. All that a bather wants is a portion of the river screened from public view, and a dry and clean place to dress on, and tho latter need not bo covered in. Tho problem surely is not so extremely difficult as to bo beyond the reach of the Municipal bodies and Road Boards to be found in Christchurch and its neighborhood.