Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 26, 22 April 1927, Page 8

Citizens Say

To the Editor.

CHEMISTS’ PRESCRIPTIONS Sir,— In reference to the controversy on the above question, will you kindly allow me space to elucidate the position? On visiting - a doctor and obtaining a written prescription from him this prescription becomes your property absolutely, providing, I suppose, you have duly paid your fee, and actually even that doctor cannot demand the return of the prescription. The chemist’s position is this: After following the directions set forth and having made up your “dope,” he is supposed to copy the prescription into a special book he is supposed to have for the purpose and hand back the original prescription, with the medicine, to the owner. No doubt he keeps the prescription for two reasons; one, so that you will be obliged to return to him for a repeat order or that he cannot be bothered copying it —it is easier to keep it. Personally I invariably ask for my prescription, and though it is handed over with bad grace I get it. That is the only remedy for what practically amounts to an autocratic action. ALSO BITTEN ONCE. POWER SUPPLY Sir, — The unsatisfactory position obtaining at Arapuni cannot be viewed other than seriously. It affects vitally the combined operations of all the various power boards equally with the Auckland Power Board. The regulation from Hora Hora over the existing network even now calls for considerable comment, and in view of the failure of the contractors at Arapuni to complete within the specified time power users generally cannot view without alarm the conditions that will probably result during the winter of 1928, due to the overlapping of power and lighting services which occurs at this season. Evidently no provision has been made by the Public Works Department to meet the contingency that has now arisen. Is its policy so entirely free from criticism that # it could afford to overlook what any reputable power supply corporation would have considered a real necessity for the combined protection of its own and clients’ interests? With regard to Arapuni this should have been a first consideration. The element of doubt in the minds of engineers qualified to pass an opinion on matters relating to construction work at this site is not a “bogey,” and even at this stage of the work carries some conviction.

It would be interesting to know “and as a public we should know” why in 1923 the offer of the English smelting firm of Summerson and Sons, Darlington. England, was unacceptable to the Minister of Public Works. The rejection. of the smeltihg company’s offer (although it had the loyal support of the Prime Minister, the late Rt. Hon. W. E. Massey) lost to New Zealand a valuable industry controlled by English capital, together with a robust stand-by steam station of considerable import-

ance in that it would have been located in an area totally void of marketable water-power, and would have linked up admirably with the Government’s major scheme; and what is of extreme importance, it would have allowed of a genuine comparison to be made as to the relative capital and operating costs of the steam station with the hydro plant under identical conditions. I maintain in matters of national importance such as this,.a statement of facts by the Minister responsible is a reasonable request only, and should be forthcoming-, particularly now, when this unfortunate position, to which it offered a solution, has arisen. INDUSTRY. BROADCASTING “GOOD” STUFF Sir, — Your correspondent “ Radio Fan ” is surely a dyspeptic listener indeed to write so cantankerous a letter on last Monday’s transmission, unless his main idea was to advertise the fact that he possesses an expensive set. This concert was an “ extra ” for Easter, and was quite enjoyable. Regarding the payment of artists, if the writer had only waited until the following evening he would have heard the Lyric Four, minus one performer who was ill, representing the best talent in Auckland. The “ Four ” probably command a quite, respectable fee for their services. “ Radio Fan ” must be badly bitten by the distance bug, for the glamour of Australia is all over his letter. Personally, I have a set that I am prepared to back against his, although I claim no space to mention its expensiveness, and yet as far as actual musical quality is concerned I am satisfied that no Australian station comes in with the same clearness and lack of distortion that marks IYA. Of course, I have no doubt that listeners in Sydney and Melbourne write in similar strain if they resemble “ Radio Fan ” in disposition, and see no good in their local performances. If only he could hear Madagascar or Kamschatka probably even the Australian programme would lose favour. For me E am satisfied to get a concert like last Monday’s for a relative price of ess than a penny. , —SATISFIED. A SATISFIED LISTENER Sir,— t Surely the remarks of “Radio Fan” are completely uncalled for. Those artists who broadcast last Monday evening evidently satisfied and pleased the great bulk of listeners, and it ill becomes some one who is seeming afraid to sign his name to attack them as a means of voicing his discontent with the company. As a matter of fact I fancy that after reading his letter it will be easy to identify the source of so much radio trouble-squealing. In view of the fact that well over three hundred original programmes are broadcast each year, with the necessity of using constantly the same artists and items, it is a wonder to one writer and listener that the amount of fresh-

ness and variety is maintained. It is a pity that “Radio Fan” should react so violently to the fact that he has just paid his licence fee feels depresse. about it. Perhaps if he cheers up a little he may not feel it so badly! It is very noticeable that these critics are anonymous. If they have the courage of their convictions, why not. come right out into the open so that we wno are satisfied may judge as to their ability to criticise. Probably none o them could organise anything. Or is « that they do not care to meet the artists whom they so blithely criticise? D. HOPKINS. CHINA TO-DAY One of “Reciprocity is Right s ut?pronouncements is, “We live in a of stern realities,’’ but he himself persist in wandering into the realm® divinity and mythology. The Chine problem is at best a sordid affair a of the earth, earthy. . * He continues to stress the po that complete freedom does not exi Quite true; but it is a far cry * r the sovreignty demanded by specting peoples to the state of va£ age that is China to-day. . “Reciprocity is Right” has ** that he has “no time” for those : would protest against the drea - conditions under which women very small children toil in treaty-P *’ factories. All so protesting,. h e P emptorily orders to “shut up”*, I ql vhis own terms. Hoes he • thing of these factory condiu • They are responsible in no sma mo j2 gree for much of the present tu in China. . ...» ee t Will ‘Reciprocity is * down to bedrock —or earth, if n and state his views on the '_ on . slavery which he unequivocally dones? from I If not, perhaps he will < J Con . the Bible, the Koran or works . bc iucius those passages fron } . Wl i u tiooK draws the inspiration for his on this question. RIGHT AXD RECIPROCIT