Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 215, 30 November 1927, Page 10

Citizens Say—

(To the Editor.)

SHIPPING PROBLEMS » Sir, — May I say how pleased I was at the prominence your recent leader save to a subject of which most of us were ignorant—the treatment of British shipping in American waters. What a fuss some of our people would make if the position were reversed. I can just imagine the heap of “cousinly love folk” slating our authorities. The time for dealing out just such treatment to foreigners as we receive at their hands is overdue, and I would like to see a stiffer jaw presented .by Britain. B. AN OPERA THEME Sir, — I have been looking over the names of the Gilbert and Sullivan operas which are to be performed at His Majesty’s Theatre, and it seems to me that they have left one out which has never been done in Auckland. Of course, my eyes are not what They were in the days before the untimely death of our dear Queen Victoria, but I think I am right in saying that they have omitted one. I am sure dear Mr. Gilbert wrote an opera which I remember seeing years ago, which dealt with the doings of the City Council of some town whose name has for the moment escaped my memory. This council, if I remember rightly, starts a fish-shop, and all sorts of ludicrous happenings occur. Then it takes over the transport system of the city, and the audience is simply convulsed with laughter. I noticed they were doing one this time called “Ruddi Mess,” or some such name, and thought this might be the opera I was thinking of. But my daughter tells me it Is about something quite different. I wonder if you could find this out for me, Mr. Editor? I am thinking of standing myself for our own City Council, and wish to find out all about how to manage a city before I offer myself co the dear voters. GRANNIE. “HAMLET, SANS THE PRINCE” Sir,— The general discussion which followed Mr. Bloodworth’s address at the Economic Society on the arbitration i system showed that there are a num- ! ber of members who hold that the rates j of wages as set by the Court are, at i present at least, too high. It is I claimed that the scale is more than | industry can bear. This idea was S argued with considerable ability in “Bulletin,” No. 28, issued by he Canterbury College about four months ago, the editor quoting with approval a high English authority to the effect that “the general level of wages can be raised, only if there is an increase in the volume of wealth production.” This to the contrary, notwithstanding, the fact remains that wages could be

very materially increased without any enhanced production, by means of a more equitable distribution of the existing wealth production. All economists agree that the production “cake” is divided, a part to labour in return for services, a part to capital and the balance to rent in return for no services, but as pure tribute. That being so, it must be clear that -the elimination of the landlord, and the handing over his share to labour, would increase wages without any enlargement of the cake The editor of the “Bulletin,” when it was put to him in this way, admitted the fact. What then is the use in trying to regulate or control wage levels by a system which has no jurisdiction over the question of land tenure? How can wages be raised so long as all material progress in a community, to matter what shape it takes, is reflected in land values and accrues as rent to the landowner? Even if trifling increases could be obtained, why not direct attention to “first things first,” and put the system of distribution on a sound and equitable basis by eliminating parasitical levies on production? The world is fast drifting into a perilous condition Wages are not too high; they are but a fraction of what they should and might be, with the land question settled right. All economic problems, most political and some ethical questions, point for their solution to the tenure of land. Why waste time playing Hamlet with the Prince of Denmark left out? C.H.N. BREAD AND WRAPPERS Sir,— Hurrah for “Little Bill!** I am glad to know that the little man disapproves of tongue-moistened paper and newspaper as a wrapping for foodstuffs. Although he seems to doubt my word that I reprimanded the lady for moistening with saliva the wrapping paper, I fail to see how my reprimand was an afterthought when it was administered at the time. Perhaps the wee man said that because his little speech was too late! I agree that it would be very nice if bread were sold in dustproof packets, but I still hold that this would add to the cost of the J bread, and that the innovation would be quite unnecessary if ordinarv cleanliness were observed in all shops. Perhaps some of the master bakers would give an opinion as to the extra cost. BIG BEN. THE SKY LINE Sir,*— In spite of bad times the erection of huge cliff-like structures of steel and concrete goes on apace in Auckland. Obviously these new buildings are mostly devoted to offices whose windows rising tier upon tier above the street are sufficient to allay any anxiety regarding shortage in this particular line of accommodation —at least in the near future.

These edifices, together with the multifarious activities of their swarming

denizens strike people—and especially country people—with amazement. Ana no wonder. An inspection of the war-ren-like interiors of some of Auckland’s office blocks is an eye-opener. For, verily, the modern developments and ramifications of a system alleged to have been pioneered by the “Emigres” are impressive and awe-in-spiring. Is it any cause for wonder that tne farmers after a visit to the city have a lot of inconvenient and embarrassing questions to ask? Or is it surprising that to date no champion of the urbancase has supplied satisfactory answers. EX-FARMER NAVVYCALLAHANS V MURPHYS Sir.— , It was with great pleasure I reafl in your valuable paper “The D° u £ One’s” letter on the film, Callahans and the Murphys.” I, for one, saw this film and forgot my cares, in tb® enjoyment of one of the l>est sl<i€ " splitting comedies I have seen for many a day. lam sure this picture was never filmed with the intention of insulting the Irish. Most nationalities have at times been represented U* screen comedies, so why be thm" skinned? I congratulate “The Dou One” on his broad mind.