Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 53, 25 May 1927, Page 8

Citizens Say

To the Editor,

“AUCKLAND’S MUSSC-LOVERS” Sir, — In his letter published on Monday, “Cymro” writes: "I consider the prices charged for the Zimbalist recitals quite out of the reach of a number of real music-lovers.” It is unfortunately true that there are many real music-lovers who suffer from a lack of wealth, but there are as many others, not real, who will spend freely on clothes and cars and cabarets and cigarettes and chocolates—on anything, in fact, except music. Surely these people might well pay 6s, or half a guinea, for nearly two hours of magnificent violin-playing. How many such half-guineas were devoted to “No, No, Nanette” and how many more will be lavished in a few months’ time on “Rose Marie”? It was indeed a pity that Zimbalist gave us so little great music. But he played nothing really bad, nothing harmful, to uncultivated taste. He' did not stoop, as Kreisler has stooped, to the playing of “Pale Moon” and “Beautiful Ohio.” His concerts had far more aesthetic value than Galli-Curci’s, which were the most successful financially in the whole history of concertgiving in Australia and New Zealand. One recalls that last year the delightful concerts of the Kendall String Quartet were heard by audiences sometimes as moderate as the prices. And the visits of the New South Wales State Orchestra cannnot be remembered without a blush for the inadequate response of our public—our “nitelligent, music-loving people,” as “Cymro”'writes. There is no occasion to be hopeless about our musical taste, but for Apollo’s sake let us not be smug. _ R.J.B.

“WE”—AND OTHERS

Sir, — In your correspondence column in Tuesday’s SUN, under the above heading, I was rather amused by the remarks of one signing himself “Uriah the ’lttite,” in which he states it is certainly impossible for Australians to be “more broad-minded or more anything else” than we; I take it for granted ‘we’ means New Zealanders generally. He returning New Zealanders who are interviewed by newspaper reporters and remarks that we have only to read the interviews to realise that we are absolutely the last word in human progress, that we are absolutely—and most emphatically IT. Allow me to draw Uriah’s attention in this one instance to the interview and remarks made by Mr. E. W. Alison on his return from Australia, published in your columns about three weeks ago, in which Mr. Alison admitted that Australia under a Labour Government was certainly more progressive and more prosperous than New Zealand. The Australians are very much to be admired in that they have proved to the world they have the courage at least, and make a great stand against anything they consider an imposition. One has only to compare the better conditions existing in Australia than those existing here, working conditions, living conditions, and social conditions also, and I say there is no need to ask whether these conditions are obtained by a narrow-minded race. It takes cour-

age to fight for conditions such as they enjoy, practically free of monopolies, and not only courage, but effort, too. Let this “ ’lttite” look around him and consider what he has got to boast about—conditions which are next to the worst existing in any part of the British Empire. Believe me, although a native myself, my experience with New Zealanders generally has taught me that “Uriah the ’lttite” is a very fine specimen of “we.”

If it were not for thoroughly understanding the principle embodied in THE SUN newspaper and knowing the independent attitude of THE SUN, in granting space to one and all, and favouring none. I would wonder at you publishing such remarks from such an unsophisticated and uneducated mind. FAIR POP.

“AUSTRALASIA”

Sir,— Before “Uriah the ’lttite” mentioned the “Australasian” tennis teams, he might have realised that, but for the late Anthony Wilding, Australia might have had but few chances of winning that coveted trophy—the Davis Cup. So is it to be wondered at that we didn’t object to Australians including New Zealand under the word “Australasia,” even though New Zealand had no player worthy of inclusion in an Australasian team sent overseas to compete for the cup? “Australasia” literally means Australia and New Zealand, and should the word be rejected certain firms of Australian origin, but also operating here, would possibly find it necessary to alter their titles. As for our broad-mindedness and progress; with out Pullman trains, our splendid tram services, and our sneering at American tourists with their different clothes and manners, we are undoubtedly IT beyond par! D.A.B.

CRIME IN AUCKLAND

Sir,— From your report on the above in last night’s SUN, it appears that the commissioner’s remarks have excited considerable indignation in many leading citizens of Auckland, and justly so. But, Sir, there is one statement made by the commissioner that I would like to touch upon. He stated that when the additional members of the force which he intended to supply from the South were in action, Auckland would have 33 detectives, as many as Queensland had to cope with a population of 880,000 people. And he further stated that in Queensland the police were keeping crime down, while in Auckland crime was on the increase. Now all this may be quite true, but there is a very marked difference between the condition of Auckland—or any other part of this country for the matter of that—and conditions of Queensland at the present time. In Queensland there is little or no unemployment; the standard of comfort is higher and the people are more contented and therefore more law-abiding. It is not that the Police Force over there is any better, or perhaps as good as our own, but good government, prosperity and contentment make good citizens; and this phase of the question both the commissioner and his critics seem to have

overlooked. A return to comparative prosperity in this country would do more to put down crime than any number of policemen, and I venture to say that if the conditions—or anything like the conditions—existed in Brisbane as exist in Auckland, the authorties over there would have a problem on their hands that would tax their abilities to cope with, and I know something of the people of Queensland* OLIVER MASON. Morningside.

COMMISSIONER McILVENW Sir, — The sensational and startling state* ments emanating from the Commissioner of Police are in the criminal statistical history of New Zealand. Assuming that the condition of affairs were in accordance with the commissioner’s statements, then why had he permitted them to attain the hold he claims without taking necessary action in the interim? Fur* thermore, before taking coercive action, why does he give voice to rhetorical and pantomimic utterances ID the columns of the Press? Anyone possessed of common sense can instantly decipher them as being akin to burlesque. The late Sir Charles Warren, G.C.M.G., K.C-B-Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, resigned because his subordinates failed to lay hands upon tha socalled “Jack-the-Ripper,” and his resignation was duly accepted. If the Commissioner of the New Zealand Police is unable to rid Auckland of crime, inclusive of c*leaning-up ar ~j tocratic Grey Street (and I must aaa the commissioner’s alleged own words. “Crime has the upper hand”), then . fully demonstrates that he is un f Dl to deal with it; and instead of making orations with a view to concealing inefficient administration, would dig® and honour not have been bette r f erV if the commissioner had placed his r©s* Agnation in the hands of the Lrim Minister—through the official channels?

J. A. HOPE-JOHNSTONE, Major, late Imperial Array, J-P-*