Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 27, 23 April 1927, Page 8

Citizens Say

FREEDOM ABUSED Sir. — It is painful to witness that, on every occasion Great Britain becomes involved in any foreign “affair,” small bodies of people, within the Empire, British only by birth, make a large noise in encouragement of the opposing force, and always preach against their Motherland. They can never see any good in the actions of their own country. The “Breathes there a man” spirit is dead within them and their only desire is, apparently, to help make harder a position already complicated. No other nation tolerates such conduct, why should we? Our laws, far , too free, are being abused and to correct this “rotten state” a cleaning outof undesirable elements should be made. It often makes me marvel why they prefer to live under our protection when, to them, we are so “unclean” in our foreign relationships. J. H. B. “ALSO HOPING” Sir, — “Here's Hoping” and “Radio Fan” are types of a small section of people whose opinions, fortunately, carry but little weight. I speak of the destructive critics who go morbidly through life, picking boles and finding fault in the best devised schemes and never offering a suggestion or remedy (except rushing about and brandishing loud-speakers), either through unwillingness or, more likely, inability. “Here’s Hoping’s” knowledge and

To the Editor.

appreciation of music is sadly lacking when he says that such songs as “Until,” “Homing,” and “The Trumpeter” harass him. He vaguely suggests that some of the better songs of modern composers be included. Which does he mean? I have listened in to plenty of admittedly good modern songs, well sung, from IYA. If he would mention one or two of his “better song's” one would know where his tastes lie. I, for one, am well satisfied with the IYA entertainments, some of which are really excellent, and for the modest sum of one penny. Only persons like “Here’s Hoping” could complain. That “Here’s Hoping’s” next contribution to these columns contains a little more constructive matter and a great deal less “hot air,” I ALSO HOPE.

CHEMISTS' PRESCRIPTIONS Sir, — As a reader of your interesting paper, I beg to differ with “Also Once Bitten,” and others who have written letters in the same strain. Their experience has not been mine: as a nurse [ suppose I have visited the different chemists as often as most people, and I can honestly say that every time I have ever asked for the return of the prescription it has been cheerfully given back to me. Mjr. Editor, I think we should be fair in our remarks. I don’t think that chemists deliberately keep them for the reasons mentioned by “Also Bitten” and others: it may be it is because they are not asked for, or they don’t want to be bothered copying them. There are always some persons in the world who make mountains out of molehills. We are all

very glad to get our medicines and we forget the kindness of the chemists, who are sometimes called «up at night and have long hours of duty. The least we can do is to be thankful there are chemists, and let “Also Once Bitten” and others ask for their prescriptions back, and they will get them. I have always found chemists to be very kind, courteous and obliging. NURSE J. CLAYTON.

EVOLUTION NOW Sir, — I am pleased A.E.C. has made another attempt to bolster up his opinions because it gives one an opportunity of showing to what extremes some people will go in regard to modern myths and theories. Your correspondent has endeavoured to reply to me under the heading “ Plumcots and Blue Poppies.” How nice. It makes one’s mouth water, and at the same time it shows A.E.C. is getting a trifle hard up for information. Your correspondent has, all along, evaded my position in regard to resemblances found in embryology, comparative anatomy and palaeontology. In place of this he has dealt with such matters as his nom de guerre, and the “ manufacture ” of species. The resemblances just alluded to absolutely shatter materialistic evolution; while, at the same time, they supply unanswerable evidences of unity of design. I challenge anyone to disprove this statement. —REUBEN E. DOWLE.