Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 41, 11 May 1927, Page 8

Citizens Say

To the Editor-

BIBLE IN SCHOOLS Sir, Your correspondent, John Bailey takes a very narrow view of this question. He regards it as sectarian propaganda. I have had some experience m the matter, and I regard it as quite otherwise. I have been a teacher in denominational schools in England— Anglican and Wesleyan—and in both the Bible teaching was quite unsectarlan. Teachers who are prone to propaganda work —and these are very scarce—would have plenty of opportunity for it in our secular schools in explaining- the literature of the read,, mg books, all of which contains more or less religious matter. I hold that as long- as the State makes use of the Bible for the purpose of oaths in our law courts, the State schools should give some idea of what the Bible stands for. Again, all our literature is permeated by the Bible, and cannot be understood or explained without Bible references. I have had 40 years' experience in New Zealand schools and I feel quite convinced that our teachers could be trusted to give Bible lessons without undue bias, if they were directed to use it as literature, and a basis of moral teaching. H. R. H. STOCKINGS! Sir,— Now that silk stockings appear to atti^ 6 p 5, lncipal portion of feminine attire, and certainly the most costly dress item in the year’s bill, we might dweli a little on the fact that we import millions of pairs of stockings a year, and that, so far as I can gather (or else the makers are too modest to advertise), this country has no stocking manufacturers, but contents itself with turning out a few '°,S ks f L° m its m ? 1Is - Think of it 500,000 New Zealand women ought to be wearing New Zealand- made stockmgs. I read lately that a British provincial chamber of commerce passed a resolution deploring the' Australian tariff wall, which was going to put many British stocking-makers out of employment. Australia had for three years previously imported £1,500,000 worth of stockings annu ally. She got tired of it. put a higher duty on this article, and already the industry of stocking-making has made immense strides. A tariff does not put anybody out of work. It brings the manufacturers out, personally to climb the wall and build a factory, and manufacture his goods on the other side —simply a movement of industry. STOCKINGETTE. CHINESE PROBLEMS Sir, Ostrich-like, ‘-flight and Reciprocity” will not face the fact that an Auckland lady can live on three pence a day in China; although so doing gets him “nowhere at all.” Millions are living on less than that. Beggars and bandits galore in China live without wages. Artificial “budgets” are almost worthless, for they may range anywhere according to the standard of living desired. Chinese officials with the highest salaries find these too small, and “squeeze” is universal. It is commonly asserted in America that the cost of living in China is as high as in the United States. Certainly it is to the missionaries and Y.M.C.A. secretaries who, to justify their salaries, make it so. One great trouble with China to-day is that the increase of roughly 400 per cent, in wages since 1900 has upset the economic equilibrium. Chinese in comfortable and

affluent circumstances have been rendered comparatively poor by the depreciation of money due to increase in wages. Naturally these men hate the factories foreign especially w'hich have impoverished them. Precipitancy is unjust to them. Yet these foreign capitalists are the hope of China, for only as China produces for export can she hope to obtain the best prices for her commodities, and only as she exports can she afford to import and be of value as a market for others. Russia has recovered from her anti-capitalist madness, and China is doing the same. The puerile policy of Mr. H. E. Holland that Britain should withdraw from China would spell disaster which the Kuomintang itself deprecates. We are all agreed on the necessity of raising the standard of living in China. Yet we cannot fairly compete with China and America po long as our industry is handicapped by the existing Arbitration Court and its recognition of the “living wage.” It is ridiculous to say, “Capital has no nationality.” Hankow bandits may say that, but not the British Tommies in Shanghai. If the League of Nations were worth its salt it would confute the lie that tariff and immigration laws are “purely domestic.” Nations have a right to trade directly and to demand reciprocity, and to take it, by unilateral action, where it is denied.. RECIPROCITY IS RIGHT.

“SEE FOR YOURSELF!”

Sir,— I must apologise for proffering a reply to such hackneyed arguments as “Progress” raised last night against my letter of May 6; doing this only for the sake of those who still share his beliefs through ignorance. (1) He mentions that a member of the tramway committee said it would be possible to transport over the proposed line 20,000 pasengers to Point Chevalier on holidays. As a resident ™£^ rnel1 ’ 1 can only ask: Why should 20,000 people want to go to Point Chevalier on holidays? Where and when would they find the necessary 70 or 80 cars at their disposal? Even a city councillor knows that a tramline constructed for occasional holiday traffic is not economically sound. (2) The “alacrity with which the bus companies unloaded theiy plant on to the council” was just such alacrity as “Progress” himself would show were he suddenly called upon to choose between an irate Jersey bull and a jump through a barbed-wire fence. Even a Britisher is not always a tree man.

(3). “Why this anxiety for buses in preference to electric cars?”—merely tliat we like a modern, quick and elastic means of transport, instead of one that blocks up Queen Street and fails all along the line if only one wheel jumps the rail.

(4). H is a stupid policy to send OU £i_ m ° n iy to Ameri ca for petrol and rubber” was borrowed from a part of Mr. Fore’s report that rings false. It must be news to learn that Britishers supply America with all her rubber and own more petrol than she does. It would also be an eye-opener to see how many Auckland trams have 4 and . controllers from the ij’ America ~ Have not our trams already done their fair share in makmg the adverse trade balance? Total up their expenditure on rails bitumen, wires, switches, all steelwork on trams, generators, motors, etc., obtamed abroad.

Electric power is not necessarily cheap, even obtained from our splendid waterfalls.” Arapuni will be no fairy godmother unless the Government shoulders much of the cost. It

will make electricity plentiful, but n cheaper. Engineers know that P oW . developed from coal at Huntly woub* cost less. , . (5). Alas, that I have found no victors to tell me ours is the most ® ficient transport system in the * They do tell me ours is clean ana conductors are polite. But that . not exactly efficiency. As one on has served in different capacities the technical staff of an organisa , which transports by electric train tram no less than twice the en population of New Zealand ea f, j neS I can only say that “Progress not know what efficiency is. Ins of taking someone ele’s word t° t see for yourself. See what y° a . t 0 for your money in a sixpenny n Onehunga; then on the wings . fancy pay 2£d and take a tram from one end of San Francisco x other; or pay 2£d and travel nt jje trie train, tram, or bus the length of Manhattan Island; or as pay 2£d and ride a hundred round and round the Chicago 1 , oC or squander 3d and go across u by bus. Then talk efficiency. , •avalKE 11 -