PRINCIPLE OR PRINCIPAL?

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 9, Issue 580, 2 November 1920, Page 2

PRINCIPLE OR PRINCIPAL?

MAYOR AND "R.F.W."

PROPOSED WAR MEMORIAL.

The following letter has qeen received by the "Times" on the war memorial controversy:—

Sir,—There appears a letter in your issue of October 29 over the name of "R.F.W." This gentleman, no doubt, is ashamed to sign his name, but prefers to use his initials only. However, men who take up public work, including myself, by constantly coming in contact with this class of man soon get to know who are the people who are continually acting on some principle. I have found quite a number of people who would have given something to the soldiers' memorial monument: but on the principle they could not do so. Now, sir, if it ever comes to your lot to have to collect money you will find, as in the present case, that there are more neople with strong principles when they are asked to give than at any other time. When an excuse is required it is quite easy to say the principle is not all it should be. I happened to be in the company of "R.F.W." when we were waited on by Mr. Patterson and r.sked to contribute towards the fund for buying land for the Technical High School. I at that time agreed to give £5 (since paid). "R.F.W." would not give, saying that he intended to give all he could to show his appreciation of the fallen soldiers. The collector and myself considered that his objection was a just one, but s-ince that time he has evidently acquired a principle. No doubt when waited on he will be prepared to give something in the future, hoping that he will never be asked, but if he is, of course there is sure to be principle at stake. Now, the principle I have udooted, I called two public meetings, duly advertised, and personally attended them both. There was plenty of room for everyone that turned up, plenty of vacant chairs, so why engage the Premier Hall when our own chambers were far too large to accommodate the people attending the public meetings referred to ? Re the ratepayers voting on hospital, swimming baths and monument, that is quite correct. We could not get the hospital, the swimming OHths were next in order, a monument being last on the list. I then -ailed a public meeting and explained the position to the ratepayers. If there were not many there, that surely was not my fault. I explained that to erect swimming baths and some suitable front design with the names of the soldiers that left- our district would cost at least .tI2OO, and we considered it more than -we could raise by subscription, so the council then decided to include swimming baths in the loan proposals, which was done and sanctioned by the people, and will be built as soon as money and material are available. It was then decided to erect some memorial in the recreation ground, but circumstances changed. Mr. W. Roulston offered his little park to the borough on certain conditions, one of which was that we spend £SOO on some suitable war memorial. His generous oflei was accepted, «vilh the above conditions, by those in authority, and I am quite sure the burghers will, as time goes on, appreciate our action in accepting Mr. Roulston's generous offer, as this little park is centrally situated and a beautiful little spot. In time to come it will be much used by all classes of people, both local and visitors. Finally, I will say definitely that we are going to erect a suitable monument to our brave boys; it doesn't matter whether "R.F.W." gives or not. No doubt his principles will prevent him from giving. I am very pleased to say that ail the brave boys that fought for us (and some of them died for us) that we may live in prosperity, had no such gave their best, their all, without even saying that the principle of those in authority was wrong. It is now our turn to do something; let us all unite and show rur appreciation in some way, and not be looking for excuses ill the time. C. K. LAWRIE, Mayor.