Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 498, 30 October 1928, Page 8

Citizens Say

(To the Editor.)

THE UNITED PARTY

Sir, — Only two parties are worth consideration —Reform and Labour—according to the Prime Minister last evening, and yet he devoted nearly 1J hours to belittling the Uniteds and about 15 minutes to \ Mr. Holland’s party. If a thing is not to be feared, why waste ammunition on ft? The majority of us are believing that there is some understanding between Government and Labour to keep the growing middle party out. CAMOUFLAGE.

THE MODERN MISS

Sir, — Your correspondent “Emergence” is apparently one who has not yet emerged from a mid-Victorian line of thought. At what age was it not possible to throw stones at the womenfolk or evsii at the men who find themselves the victims of the terrible modern miss ?

Would he have our women back to the period of slavery from which she has freed herself by such gigantic efforts? Why will not “Emergence” and his kind realise that the conditions obtaining relating to child-birth and other matters were just as much a problem in the days of his childhood (probably about 1860), as they are to-day? The only difference is that the evolution of Government statistics is such that our weaknesses are revealed to us. Here’s to the modern miss. We regret her indiscretions, but we admire her immensely. ANTI-HYPOCRISY.

THE TRAMWAYS

Sir,— From figures published about the present financial position of city tramways it would appear that (excluding sinking fund) there is a deficiency of over £60,000. I note that accrued interest and outstanding accounts are carefully included while other assets are ignored, though there must be some—to wit, stores running well into over five figures, and, in common with all trading concerns, there must be some cash in hand. * In addition to this, the sinking fund is covered by gilt-edged securities and actual cash in hands of sinking fund commissioners. This, then, is what the city ratepayers are asked to hand over—a practically solvent tramway system and £368,000 worth of gilt-edged securities and actual cash—and for no consideration whatever. Just walk in Transport Board, walk out city ratepayers. This has not been made clear to the voters. Such a transaction is not conceivable in ordinary business. CITY RATEPAYER.

MR. LEE’S INVITATION

Sir,— In to-night’s Sun someone signing himself Worker, says I made sneering references to my opponent the other night. So far I have mentioned no opponent’s name, and the only refer-

ence I have made is to a line in a leaflet about Auckland East requiring a protesting voice in Parliament. I have laughed at this, and may laugh again yet, and may even mention my opponents by name, but the letter of “Worker” is untimely. “Worker” says I made wild statements for two hours. If so my discomfiture is easy and defeat must follow. We impose no censorship on questions. Anyone who can ask anything in a clear, firm voice, will get an answer. Therefore, what a glorious opportunity “Worker” loses when he runs away from the meeting and vents his spleen on paper instead of confounding me at the meeting. It is true I have laughed at many other candidates, for 1 have found laughter to be the great destroyer of pretension. As one who is not a “political novice” I invite my critic to try a bout at my expenge. No one will howl him down when he attempts to ask a question. If he writes splenetically when I laugh at a phrase in my opponent’s manifesto, I fear me he will tear hiis hair if I have occasion really to become personal. JOHN A. LEE.

THE BIBLE IN SCHOOLS

Sir, — I thank the Rev. A. S. Wilson for the fuller statement of his views upon the above. His main contention is that to exclude the Bible from our schools is cruelly to rob the people of their rights. In what way? The secular system in no way robs the people of the Bible or of their unrestricted use and interpretation of it. There are in the Dominion more churches than schools, with an army of ministers, teachers and workers whose prime object is to propagate the Bible and its teachings. The people are manifestly not being robbed of the Bible, nor is it a right that is contended for, but a special privilege. Mr. Wilson and his friends say to their opponents in effect: “We insist that you pay for instructing my children in doctrines which you do not accept.” Does Mr. Wilson conceive that non-Christians have no rights in educational expenditure? In a community composed entirely of Christians Mr. Wlison has admitted that it would be unjust to teach any specific doctrine such as Anglicanism or Catholicism. Then in a State comprising Christians, non-Christians and persons without religion, it would be equally unjust for the State to teach a composite form of Christianity. I claim that to be unanswerable and await Mr. Wilson’s reply. The boasted conscience clause has no more bearing upon the latter than it would upon the former contingency.

Mr. Wilson’s second argument is that the Bible is necessary for moral training. As already shown, there are already ample facilities for its use in that manner, but further, there are many authorities who contend that the Bible is inadequate as a moral text book, or for the foundation of character; that much of our present day ethics were unknown or not appreciated until more than a millenium after the canon was settled. They maintain

that character is founded on sound heredity, decent home conditions, reasoned moral training and, most important, a high example set by parents and teachers. A.E.C.

the Transport board

Sir, — Every ratepayer would be well advised to go to this poll and vote against the creation of the proposed Transport Board. The board will be a monopoly. Monopolies are always non-progressive and tyrannical. The City Council has the right to maintain a majority on the board, and k is a moral certainty, the policy & the board will be directed by the very men who have failed to provide efficient transport up to the present moment. The board is given rating powers. Rates are now quite oppressive enough. At the present time we have five corporate bodies with authority to tear up the streets. To add a sixth is a wasteful and unnecessary expense. The setting up of the board predicates another swarm officials for the public to keep. 11 we turn down this cumbersome proposal it will give an opportunity to inaugurate a transport control system more in keeping with British ideal** All the control needed could be provided by a simple, inexpensive businesslike body constituted on the line* of hotel licensing committees. ® uc *L, a board would encourage reasonable competition and thereby ensure continuous improvement and courteous service. The Parliament which given its sanction to this stupm transport board proposal is notoriously the least intelligent tb l -” Dominion has ever endured, and if electors are alive to their own intereet» they will seize the opportunity to elect most of the many able young pen who are N now offering their servicesIf this is done we may reasonably expect that a transport control system will be devised which will ensure p* the control required without the ra* e * payers being penalised by furtbe onerous liabilities, for which there *■ not the slightest necessity. J. PARLAN*