Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 278, 14 February 1928, Page 8

Citizens Say —

(To the Editor.)

AVIATION CLUB Sir, — I am agreeably surprised to hear that one of our progressive citizens is paving the way for an Aviation Club here. Would it not be a profitable investment for someone to form a company to purchase one of the latest seaplanes for use on our beautiful harbour? I am sure there would be no trouble in finding enough passengers to make it a paying concern. INTERESTED. ANOTHER SHOT AT THE TARGET Sir, I assume from Ills letter that “Another A. 8.” is a member of the crew of either of the two sloops, Veronica or Laburnum, which I suggested might be used as theoretical targets by the cruisers. It certainly takes no small amount of nerve to stand quietly by while a cruiser drops salvoes of shells into : the water just astern (again theoretically). Sloops in the Australian Navy had a justifiable ‘moan,” at being treated thus, and no doubt “Another A. 8.” wishes to discourage such a method being adopted in the New Zealand squadron. I have always been under the impression that “sailors don’t care.” Perhaps if I had “Another A.B.’s” sea experience I would know better. I am # sorry to hear such a poor tribute to the accuracy of the men behind the guns as his. “Whatever damage might result (to the target) from gunnery practices it is, as a general rule, accidental,’ he says. From a series of articles in The Sun recently I gathered, I hope not erroneously, that the shooting of our ships was particularly accurate. R.A.N. ROTARY Sir,— I think there are good reasons why Rotarians should not be unduly exorcised over recent criticism levelled at them allegedly in the name of “The Man in the Street.” The chances are that Rotary, a comparatively-recent institution here, has not yet been given the “once over” by that übiquitous gentleman. Furthermore, it seems to m e that he who essays to speak far the “Man in the Street”—the whole umpteen hundred thousand of him that is—takes in altogether too much territory. Those people who still believe that a pot-pourri of clubland’s smoke room gossip can be served up as the opinion of “The Man in the Street,” and will be swallowed as such, have

another think coming. No; these days are gone for ever, and no coterie, however great its pundits, can ever bring them back again. Rotary, obviously an organisation of the hail-fellow-well-met variety, will, of course, be taboo where dignity and aloofness are traditional fetishes. Imagination boggles at the thought of elderly, frock-coated, top-hatted business men —or those inheriting their traditions—hailing one another as Bill, Mac, Smithie, etc. It simply can’t be done; and so Rotary may look for “hard going”—in spots. Unlike some other cults, however, Rotary obviously does not seek to shroud itself in an atmosphere of semi-secrecy, and mat alone, I should imagine, is rather refreshing to “The Man in me Street,” who. by the way, has grown to be a very diverse and numerous fellow indeed. And the end is not yet; for still he grows, and learns, and digests. And what of that other factor looming ever larger? What of “the woman in the street?” The lady will no longer brook being ignored. But while to speak for her requires—in mere man—temerity of no mean order, not to do so is tantamount to political hara-kiri. “THE MAN ON THE ROAD.” PERPETUAL MOTION Sir,— Are we expected to take seriously the article in last Thursday’s Sun regarding the alleged invention of a machine developing perpetual motion. The greater part of a column is given to the Question, and we are told that a well-known consulting engineer lias made a favourable report on the invention. What a pity he did not become better known by giving his name, and what a fine thing it would have been if he had been true to his designation and had consulted someone who knew something of the principles of mechanics. A sixth form schoolboy might have given him some information on the subject, and some higher authorities, such as the science teachers at the university would doubtless have assured him that the whole thing is an impossibility. There are also, in the public library and elsewhere, scientific works which might have been consulted, but it is possible that if he had done these things his report might not have been so favourable to the machine. Let any of your readers who are interested try the following experi- ’ ment: Take two loops, of rope or leather, put one foot in each loop, then grasping the rope or strap firmly, pull steadily upwards. If he can succeed in lifting himself and sustaining himself from the ground, if it is only for

a minute, perpetual motion is po*®jJ because a related principle is invob* in both instances. . A word to the unwary may no* JJ out of place. Before a man of his hard-earned, but easily cash into any scheme of that kind* •* should make a short study of **** called “Conservation of Bner * y Ljr Force.” It may open his eyes to Mg* and the same study might be to others who are wasting their in trying to Invent machines iot V* ducing perpetual motion, which * absolute impossibility. ARCHIMEDES. THE CIVIC INQUIRY Sir, — Apparently your correspond “Grafton Ratepayer” has a psrw sense of humour. I, as yet, see n t humorous or highly amusing “ m t Murray Inquiry. I have had ** gA*. much opportunity as “Grafto® sobpayer” to peruse the evidence mitted and the “multitude ot and regrettable facts” present obvious. When deaims j evidence the usual arrive at the “facts” after a I the evidence. Perhaps it suits j (respondent better to believe story he has heard. Perhaps ’ & I story is suitable pro P a^an . < A y.i-yjd t* i collection lists now being_f arc ' p&bMf 4 1 defray Mr. Murray’s costs. * jp. | again ratepayers may not it J dined to subscribe after tn j We got yesterday another (“The sale of a launch and. I £ 350 to, I think, a Mr. 'does that mean? Wai I small, or was Mr. f * Is there any suggestion oi ** what is it all about? 1 If the suggestion is that I lost on the deal why not i out? STRAIGHT*©****