Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 579, 4 February 1929, Page 8

Citizens Say —

(To the Editor.)

NEW ZEALAND BUTTER I have had 42 years’ experience of dairy farming in North Auckland. For eight years I was a director of the Maungatapere Dairy Factory. Part of that time I was chairman. And 1 believe Sir Thomas Clement is right in describing our grading system as •old-fashioned and out of touch with the requirements of the consumer at Home.” As for the shortage of second grade butter this season, you must remember, sir, that last season a lot of butter graded “finest” in New Zealand was held in London by the Control Board so long that it had to be so?.d at last as second grade. Perhaps the Londoners acquired a taste for it, and, like Oliver Twist, are asking for more. We may expect an improvement in our butter from now onwards, because so many farmers are milking by hand. ROWLAND HILL. Otuhi. Jan. 31, 1929.

CHEAPER TRANSPORT Sir, — I wish to assure Mr. Morten that the public lias ceased to be amused at the doings of the Transport and other boards set up from time to time to try a long-suffering people. The new move against which Mr. Morten kicked is certainly “one out of the bag.” The tramway authorities, having by dint of persecution and great expense to the public obtained the monopoly of the bus services, now tell us (as most of us anticipated they would) that the services don’t* pay! Private enterprise is to be encouraged to take over the least-paying portion of this non-paying service—and this with the prospect of a reshuffle in three months. One cannot fool the people all the time, and this, I feel sure, will be made plain when the new loan proposals come up for decision. When are we going to do away with those useless, expensive, and meddlesome forms and allow competition to supply us with the better, cheaper and safer transport thut we desire? TRAM OR BE TRAMPLED. THE TRANSPORT BOARD Sir. — The board deserves the commendation and support of the ratepayers for its enunciation of policy as reducing the outlay on bus traffic, but it must not be overlooked that the majority of the members are nominated by the City Council, and are members of that council which has in the past so grievously mismanaged that particular branch of the business. It should also be borne in mind that the new board has taken over and is served by the same staff as served under the council. It may be, of course, that the officers who served during the disastrous bus regime of the council have been taken over, as it were, with the buses, as well as with the trams, which did better. This, however, only calls lor a strict control by the Traffic Board in giving effect to its declared policy of cutting off all non-paying bus services. And there are important reforms which have not as yet been decided on. An important change is called for in the interests of the ratepayers, who will have the ultimate voice in the election of the membership, in cutting out the competition of private buses along the routes served

by tilt) trams. There are half a dozen private bus lines competing directly with, the trams. Each passenger fare collected by these for the length of !io respective mileages over which the trams operate is affecting tramway revenue. The amount must be considerable. There would, of course, have to be bus services from the termini of the present tram lines, but there would be no lack of private enterprise to extend services functioning with the tram services. The fact t|iat such a glaring anomaly has prevailed under the traffic management of the past is a reason for the members of the present administration to act independently, and move away from the mistakes of the past. Let the members of the Transport Board cast their eyes east and south, ar.d observe the instances in which private bus lines might be required to confine their business to linking up with the trams from their termini or from points along the tramway lines where the routes to outlying districts diverge. * One important consequential improvement would be that numbers of buses privately owned would be taken off the more congested parts of the city streets. ANOTHER CITIZEN. I February 2, 1929.

STAGNANT FUNDS The people of New Zealand have cause to be grateful to Sir John Hewett, leader of the delegation representing the Order of St. John, whose Wellington speech was recorded in Friday’s Sun. He has pointed to that scandal —the administration of New Zealand’s share of surplus war funds—and urged that steps be taken to put it to some good use. What have we been thinking of to allow this £ 54,500 to remain idle in times of s'tress and unemployment? In effect, that money was subscribed by the people of New Zealand for the benefit of New Zealand men. Yet it has lain and still lies dormant, stagnant, useless. Most people will agree, I think, that the circumstances show a gross lack of coirV mon sense, citizenship and responsibility on the part of the New Zealand branches of the Red Cross Society and the Order of St. John. Sir John Hewett has made it clear that no grounds exist for a dispute as to the controlling authority. This absurd situation should be righted at once. Every New Zealander has a right to demand it. SUBSCRIBER. DIRECTIVITY AND DESIGN I leave readers to form their own opinion of “Freethinker.” who challenged to prove that I had misrepresented the Rev. Mr. Shebbeare and Professor James (whose actual words I quoted), ignores the challenge, and repeats the allegation. By avoiding the only honourable courses of proving his charges or withdrawing them, he brings disrepute upon the admirable but unearned pseudonym he elects to write over. Moreover, he himself misrepresents me as saying: “Natural law frequently produces what is chaos and disorder,” by suppressing the succeeding qualifying words “according to human standards,” which completely alter the meaning. “Freethinker,” despite his boastful challenging, does no more than beat (Continued in next column)

around the edge of the design argument, but gets nearer to the core wier ho asks: “Were these natural forces intelligent, or expressive of intelligence?” He answers that they must be so. since they produce higher eidthan human intelligence. But since “Freethinker” rightly accepts the tact of inexorable natural law, he cannot hold other than that human intelligence is also a product of such, and that, therefore, the ends achieved by huita' intelligence are as much an “end’ ol natural law as anything else in existence, His argument is thus destroyed by his own premises. In any case, it is meaningless to use the word* “higher” or “lower” in such a connection. Is the material microbe a higher end than the work of the man who utravels its life history, and takes mea»ures to eradicate the menace? I» the evolution of a parasite a higher eno than the construction otan ocean liner'

Further difficulties arise. is a theistic believer in natural law. “Freethinker” must logically accept the idea that these were once for all impresses, on matter “in the beginning,” and that the Lawgiver has not since interfered, for with interference the element ol chance would be introduced, and there would be no such thing as natural lav. But without directivity prayer is logic; ally useless, and the inexorableness o. the law eliminates the suggestion o. beneficence in the Lawgiver. ,77 irreconcilable difficulties are but 3 1 of the numberA besetting the thijaoe evolutionist. Will "Freethinker that fact? Meanwhile, the claims that there is no evidence an'-* no necessity to suppose that forces ever had a beginnmg, or - quired to be directed. Once grant i eternal existence of immutable natur • forces (and the counter-propositon u not rationally thinkable), then the of cosmic (as distinct from humandisorder, as an alternative to thesis of a Lawgiver, is seen to *>s a** surd. The direction which the evolutionary' agencies take is not tuitous,” since they could take hut one direction, which they have taw Nor do they need guiding any than a tramcar—there is but one air tion possible for them. \Ff