CORRESPONDENCE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLV, Issue 2577, 8 May 1923, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

(To The Editor). Sir, —A voice has spoken, a voice of the dim and distant past, and th»_ voice has informed us that spirit pf.1850 still lingers on the shrunken breast of that relic of the days that are no more. “Old Identity,” whose performance of 50 years ago consistedl of having employed women to cut his wood, while to-day he cuts it with a circular saw (spoon fed). In those days lie had no motor car in which tn lake his joy ride.-, in; in those days or nights, he had lo find his way home to his tent by the light of a glow-worm; in those days he used to go out of the tent dPor armed with a muzzle-loading musket and shoot mosquitos for Sunday dinner; in those days he used to be able to look after himself, now he lias a wet nurse to spoon feed him. And so it is, that the town of Foxton has suffered from the refusal of “Old Identity” to wake up and the fact that he must forget that what suited 50 years ago, was only in keeping with the difficulties of a newly founded settlement. We of to-day, who are more advanced, we, of the younger generation, cannot allow the cobwebs of time to obscure our vision. We of the younger generation who have taken it upon ourselves to brush aside those impediments to progress, “Old Identity,” in order to push along the town of our adoption, cannot allow the spirit of 50 years ago to stand in our way. We, of to-day, are not going to he dominated by any of these relies of 50 years ago. and while here, we proved that by putting in water and drainage despite the opposition of “Old Iden.tity.” Cannot he realise that it is in his interest that the younger generation must lead on in the march of progress. Of what use his ideas of 50 years ago are to-day, is admitted !>v him when he makes use of the facilities of travel, electricity, telephones, and those things they had not in his day. Why has “Old Identity” not yet developed the moral courage to sign his name to his letter? Does he lack that spirit of chivalry that existed in the days of 50 years ago, and will never die. But his ideas, lacking of the march of progress, and evolution, must go by the board, if the town is to make any progress and advances as far as he is concerned. Thanking von, sir, for your space, E. G. MARTIN.

Sir, —In reply to Mr McMurray’s letter which appeared in your paper re shipping and also his remaks on the public platform. He says that through local people taking shares in the s.s. Kennedy they have done harm to the port. If the sliarehol|L4 ers had not purchased the Kennedy the port would have been completely idle as no other shipping offered and whatever the loss to the shareholders, the port has been kept open to the benefit of the Board and general public. In regard to the purchase of the Kennedy, the whole of the capital, £6,000, was subscribed in cash, £5,000 to purchase the steamer and £I,OOO for working expenses. Re the insurance, the Kennedy has been insured for £4,500 for some considerable time, but the capital cost of ships being cheaper, the insurance on the vessel has been reduced by £I,OOO. There was no difficulty in obtaining this risk. Re insurance of cargoes, the buyer never insures, but the merchant insures to protect the buyer, unless the buyer stipulates otherwise. Mr McMurray formed a company some years ago to buy a steamer to trade with this port. The boat never materialised and there axe some shareholders from £25 to £2,000 still lamenting. Can Mr McMurray tell tlie public why liis steamer did not materialise? This information would be more acceptable than a criticism of the Kennedy shareholders. Some people are more expert at playing tennis than in dealing with shipping matters. I might >ay that with the improvements efl ected to the Kennedy since the purchase, she is a better vessel to-day than when the company took her • ver. Thanking you in anticipation, —I am etc., Geo. C. COLEY, Shareholder in s.s. Kennedy.