Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 514, 17 November 1928, Page 8

Citizens Say —

(To the Editor.)

HAY MAKING? Sir.— Is the City Council keeping the lower part of Albert Park for hay this summer? I ask the question because the grass in that part of the park doesn’t seem to have seen a mower for about a fortnight. It is getting coarse and rank, and the daisies make a pretty sight. But when Igo up there to eat my lunch I can’t sit down because the grass is so long that it is damp at the roots. Hoping the mower is not broken. TYPXSTE. SILENT DAYS Sir.— I notice that IYA is breaking its rule about keeping Monday as a silent day in order to broadcast the ceremonies in which Cardinal Cerretti is participating. This is altogether commendable, and to be welcomed as an instance of an elasticity all too rarely shown. It would have been very regrettable had the Broadcasting Company failed to make some such arrangement. It is a pity a point was not stretched so that the Monday’s play in the recent tennis test could not also have been broadcast. Many people throughout the country were interested in the progress of the test, and as it happened listeners-in missed the best play of the meeting. Was it« because H. W. Austin objected to the presence of a “reporter”? DOUBLE-FAULT. SIX YEARS—NOT THIRTY Sir, ‘ A Man in Place” should stick to facts, or at least try to be truthful in his statements regarding women seeking to enter Parliament. It is but 1 years sine© women were given the right to stand for election, not 30 years, as he asserts. I would advise him to try and find some quiet corner of the world, where, with a few other antediluvians, he can pray the squire and his relations, And keep us in our proper stations.” , J. M. WILLIAMSON. Manukau Road. TWO PARTIES Sir.— At the back of all the turmoil following the remarkable result of the election, we have Sir Joseph Ward s astounding assertion that certain candidates who fought the election under colours other than those of the United Party had assured Sir Joseph that, if successful at the poll, they would be supporters of his policy. It will be interesting to see who these political chameleons are! Then we have the J new member for Eden, who in his pre-

election fighting speech declared that he was an Independent, and owed allegiance to no party, and that he would like to see Sir Joseph dare to censure him when and if he ventures to disagree with that leader’s ] >licy. If that was his intention, why did he place the United and Liberal supporters in a false position by seeking election as a supporter of that honoured statesman? It seems to me that a large percentage of United candidates have been returned solely under the glamour of a revered name, and that when next they face the electors they will be very disappointed men indeed. There is clearly only room for two main political parties in New Zealand, and those parties are Reform and Labour. Candidates for parliamentary honours who cannot subscribe to the policies of those two parties should contest their seats as Independent members. J. M. DAVIES. WOMEN M.P.’S Sir, — Your correspondent on the above subject has overlooked this plain fact when he says that women are not needed in Parliament: A grave mistake was made when the right to vote was given to women in New Zealand. Women should not be asked to vote for men. Instead, they should vote to return a few women to the House to represent the real issues which affect women and children, such as laws relating to health, morality, education. child life, internationalism, etc. Man should remain on his -pedestal to do the other business of the country. In England, under the Labour Government, women were there to represent the needs of those whose condition called for help of a practical kind. And well they did their work. But here our sex was not so fortunate. B. KING. CHRISTIAN SCIENCE Sir, — I wish Ann P. Hewitt (Christian Science Committee on Publication) would explain her position more clearly and definitely. She asserted that my statement that Christian Science denies the reality of sin is incorrect. She now states that sin is equivalent to ** a raisLUte a mathematical problem.” If so, a boy who tells a lie to his teacher is no more blameworthy than a boy who makes a mistake in his arithmetic. But to say that sin is merely a mistake is to oeny the reality of sin. A real mistake is not a real sin, unless we give, an entirely new meaning to the word “sin.” How does Ann p. Hewitt reconcile her belief in the reality of sin with Mrs. Eddy's definite declarations .hat there is no sin, that man is incapable of sin, that evil is an illusion and an error and has no real basis; that there is no evil; that evil is an illusion of mortal mind; that there is no mortal mindthat mortal mind is a myth. If mortal mind has no existence, how can it have illusions? If sin is an illusion how can it be real? NORMAN BURTON.