CITY WATER SUPPLY.

Manawatu Standard, Volume LVIII, Issue 53, 31 January 1938, Page 8

CITY WATER SUPPLY.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —Your correspondent, Bora Eliot-Cotton, writing of our city’s problem concerning pure water, etc., is deserving of our congratulations. Her courageous enquiries apparently have upset some of the champions of the Tiritea scheme. The- same day (Saturday, January 22) I, with others, paid a visit to the dam; my last, too, under such climatic conditions. Standing on the top dam, the stench arising from the water was so bad indeed that one quickly removed the children of our party from such a potential source of contamination. Naturally, the columns of a paper do not permit of giving one’s real impressions, at least not as he might desire. Personally, my opinion of the whole show is that it will prove totally inadequate at no distant date for a growing city. Proposals to increase the height of the dam would only aggravate the recent conditions during real summer weather; incidentally will larger mains eliminate the cause of the effect which most of us have had a taste of. Since Saturday’s letter, quite a crop have appeared, mostly I regret to say, championing the present water supply. “Lone Furrow” is entirely over the odds in reckoning we all should be thrilled with past administrators, etc. Apparently, his opinion deals with the city water supply. If that is so, why the restrictions periodically on same? Why the augmenting of same with artesian bores coupled with pocket editions of reservoirs, which he actually mentions ? Suddenly he switches into what he accuses others of—political propaganda—and delivers a tirade against what he calls the Trades Council; imagines this and that, and finally states that being a worker he treats such tactics with contempt. Well, why write at all; if he is sincere, what a delightful contradiction. Both he and “Nutritionist” in ' particular should remember that most of us are still in the greatest school of all—that is experience—wherein we learn- that those who offer excuses are actually pleading guilty. His subsequent remarks concerning the ability and reliability, of individuals, etc., one can sidestep, by saying that time, and time alone, can teach some more than others, if certain letters are any criterion. Take the objection to an impending picnic. I have failed to see his objections in my “Standard” to, say, golf, tennis, bowls and other games too numerous to mention being held on Sundays. Perhaps he contends that others, but not workers, should be permitted to hold picnics, etc., on that day. If as he says he is a worker one is afraid lie will have to work overtime answering questions. For his benefit these vital questions which were asked in all sincerity by your correspondent on the 22nd. are still not answered. Incredible as it may seem to “Lone Furrow” and others who probablv will question this statement, in which event I will gladly name the members (adult) of our party last Saturday, 22nd, we were amazed to find just below the top dam a group of modern mermaids seated on the rocks in midstream, one of whom was actuallyy wmshing her feet and legs in the" stream, notwithstanding several notices to prevent such a happening. Perhaps “Lone Furrow” will say a fish yarn, but anyhow, let him remember others also witnessed this sickening sight, and the above offer to name some is open. So if some imagine such acts improve the water they are welcome to their opinions. In conclusion, we saw not the slightest supervision or any one patrolling while up there to prevent such a happening which the state of the water, climatic conditions, etc., coupled with the presence of what I will term an irresponsible mermaid, surely warranted. So I must say finally the water is not too good.—l am, etc., S. KINGSBEER. 1 Ranfurly Street, Palmerston North. January 27, 1938.