Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 441, 24 August 1928, Page 8

Citizens Say

(To the Editor.)

SCOTS AND HOME LIFE Sir,— 1 would like to support “Auld Reekie” in his justifiable protest against the jest of a Supreme Court Judge in Auckland about Scotsmen ill-treating their womenfolk. Although the remark might pass as humour, it was calculated to give offence to a country (and its colonial representatives as well), which has always deeply valued the sanctity of home life. COLONIAL. SCOT. SENSELESS WARS Sir,— Mr. Mulviliill asserts that machinery does not cause unemployment. He says the private ownership of land must end—quite true, and also private membership of the vast machinery on which present society depends to supply its needs. It may be said to have ended already, with most of the land mortgaged and the machinery owned by multitudes of shareholders. Slavery was not abolished in America, but was changed from chattel to wageslavery, which is now apparently changing into State serfdom, which, in its turn will be changed into social ownership and freedom, not by violence or brutal means, but by an intelligent majority of the workers learning how to use the vote-—that invincible weapon which Capitalism has given them for their emancipation. Only another world war, greater than the last, could cause Capitalism’s collapse, and no sane person desires such a catastrophe, for it would involve the destruction of civilised society. If the cave men, struggling in darkness and ignorance, with nothing to help them and with all wild nature against them, won their battle and cleared the way for us by intelligent co-operation, surely we who have knowledge and science to aid us, can also co-operate, instead of competing one against the other, and participating in senseless wars that leave the survivors asking what all the fighting was for, while the devH answers with a grin: “The woi*ld market and now you’ve destroyed it, for it was composed of the human beings who have been destroyed in the struggle.” ' WILLIAM PERRY, The Hermit of Great Barrier. [This correspondence is now closed —Ld. The Sun.] DAYLIGHT SAVING Sir,— The “sports” seem determined in their endeavour to have this abomination forced upon us again this summer. They are canvassing the city and suburbs, soliciting support where possible, with only one object in view —to obtain more time for play and pleasure. They seem to overlook at least one important fact. They are going to cause hundreds to be thrown out of employment, as this unwise interference with standard time is detrimental to a large number of business houses in the city and suburbs. Employers who retained their hands last summer, and in doing so suffered heavy financial loss, will have no hesitation in retrenching this- summer if

the “sports” are successful in attaining their object. Owing to the bad effect daylight saving has upon my business, 1 will reluctantly have to dispense with the services of six or seven married men, whom I retained last summer at considerable loss to myself. It is quite impossible for me to do so again if we have to suffer a repetition. The City Council is evidently quite favourably disposed toward local Sidey time, despite the fact that the Auckland Chamber of Commerce is opposed to it—which, if adopted, this scheme will be ten times worse than that we had to tolerate last summer, and if adopted will only cause endless confusion, inconvenience, unemployment, and loss of business. The only one who will benefit by the change are the “sports,” mostly young folk with no cares or responsibilities. I think, in connection with this burning question, the City Council should first consider the business interests of the city, and the employers who have to pay the wages, rents, rates, and taxes. Sport and pleasure, while essential, should be a secondary consideration. Daylight saving would be all right if it were beneficial to everyone, and if no one suffered loss or hardship, but our experience here, as that of employers in several States of Australia. where it was tried for one summer only and rejected, has proved otherwise. Only one-half of the community derived minor benefits, while the other half suffered loss of business, inconvenience, and hardship. Then I say let us drop this summer time farce, and allow standard time to prevail, when everyone will be happy and satisfied, including the “sports,” as in days gone by. SANE STANDARD TIME. SUNDAY OBSERVANCE Sir, — I would like to congratulate Archbishop Julius on his outspoken opinion of the above, and differ most heartily from the sentiments expressed in your leader and by various ministers and local business men. What is the nature of this divine enactment to keep the Sabbath? IX we turn to Exodus xxxi, 12-17, we find that the Lord spoke unto Moses in part as follows:—“. . . Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore . . . everyone that defilith it shall surely be put to death . . . Wherefore the Children, of Israel shall keep the Sabbath ... It Is a sign between me and the Children of Israel for ever.” Seeing that the same law institutes the Sabbath and stipulates the death penalty for non-observance, is there not something inconsistent about Christians who insist on the observance of one part of the command but ignore the penalty contained in the other? Is it permissible for Christians to pick and choose among the laws ascribed to the Lord? But the main point of the quotation is that the covenant is with the Children of Israel, and not with the children of any other nationality. Further, there is not a single text in the whole New Testament containing anything in the nature of a command to Christians to observe the Sabbath. How do Christians square their strict injunction of Sabbath observance with that? One writer states that tennis on

public courts is wrong on Sunday, because it might offend the susceptibilities of religious passers-by : would like It satisfactorily explained k what way these tender susceptibility (which at bottom amount to an tapertinent intolerance of freedom d action for others) are more to be regarded than the rights of those "b" desire to enjoy themselves in * different manner. Suppose that tk tennis players complained that 9* sight of “unco-guid’’ wending the.' way in Sunday black to chan* offended their susceptibilities as what was right conduct, they would laughed to scorn, yet they would k just as logical or illogical a» gentleman cited above. * AE-C.

WHAT’S GONE WRONG WITH FOOTBALL?

Sir. — . After reading reports of the reee - League football d£b&cle in D qpc ~°' makes one wonder what has gone with the football world. The Hawke’s Bay v. Wairarapa furly Shield match of a seasons ago was probably the trusting match ever played in Zealand. 0 f On top of that, your tabled repo, one of the early matches the Ail played in South Africa, read: ing area resembled a battleflel The writer has private advice rough play has been consider* prevalent than your cabieo from Africa indicate. .lined «* On first thoughts one i* , jggt blame the referees for la* co * trainone can hardly blame them { to canny after treatment me Mr. McKenzie, the referee to the match previously referred to, A few salutary lessons are cer needed. fOOTBALI*

NOTICES TO CORRESPOND!^ R.R.— You have left to too late. Interest in the which you refer has now s Ed. The Son. me ideeE.S.— Your assumption “ ’ V tity of the writer of ' ter is quite incorrect.— t-a.