Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 700, 27 June 1929, Page 8

Citizens Say —

v HARBOUR BRIDGE Sir,— “Earnest Critic’’ writes supporting the Hon. E. W. Alison in his claim that the Harbour Bridge proposal is premature. It is such an attitude that holds cities back and, in some cases, causes them to revert to the status of towns. It is generally recognised that the bridge must come if Auckland and the North Shore are to expand as they deserve to do. We must, therefore, leave no stone unturned. Investigations should be mad 3 at once, and I trust the association will not allow any non-progressive opinion to alter its determination to go straight ahead with this splendid scheme. Those who know Sydney will lfalise what the harbour bridge is going to mean to the capital of New Soutl\ Wales. Auckland is «n the same position as Sydney so fac as settlement across the harbour is concerned. X would like to see a start made next week. PRONTO. “TOO SOON” Sir.— Although the Hon. E. W. Alison may be open to a charge of special pleading 1 cannot help but agree that the Harbour Bridge project is premature. I am afraid Auckland is a city that takes seven and a-half in hats, when a schoolboy’s size is all that should be needed at our age. I'll wager that a bridge, estimated by its supporters to cost £ 800,000 would involve that million a 7, Quarter mentioned by “Earnest Lritic. Anyway, who wants an £BOO,OOO bridge when our Sydney friends can show a £6,000,000 span and think nothing of it? Would it not be far more advisable to cry “taihoa” for 2d years until we can afford to build something worth while? The bridge builders seem to have lost all idea of perspective. No doubt the bridge will come in due course, but let us mark time until ambitious Auckland can really afford such an expensive luxury. HORATIUS. AUCKLAND WEST UNITED PARTY Sir,- — Being a member of the Auckland West Branch of the United party I was surprised to read in the Press that another branch was formed for this district on Monday evening last, at the

(To the Editor.)

head office rooms. The members of the existing branch paid their yearly subscription some months ago to the treasurer and were given receipts in the name of the Auckland XVest Branch of the United Party. This gentleman, I understand, resigned his position last Vo ok and has now been appointed chairman of the new branch without any Intimation having been given to the supporters in the electorate that such branch was to be formed. I would like Mr. Nelrnes to state the reason why a new branch was necessary, and how many of the Auckland West electors were invited to be present at Mondays gathering. Also, are those members who have paid their subscriptions to be transferred to the new branch ? Auckland west member. “TALKING WAR” Sir, — How tactful of .Lieut.-Colonel T H Dawson to utter, at the present moment. sentiments about the New Zeai^ n< l bo e b , e * ns a born fighter and ready notb-o f 0r r t , h i to , kiH at a moment's notice. It is this kind of thing that creates war. “Should the worst ever tin'nAv naturally w 6 hope that it will not—New Zealand will not have about the personnel of any foices that may have to be called upon for service overseas,” he savs Whv always refer to the worst happening” n> not educate our youth that war impossible? Then in time it will be impossible. It there must be home defence for a few more years, let it remain quiet and unobtruf”'®- 14 1S a f atal policy for a voung healthy nation like New Zealand to parade continually its paltrv military fig r hufg h and think f ° r ever ia o? Hamilton. C.C.T. BUS-PATRONS’ PROBLEMS Sir. beAushit T ncl ® Jim " How gallantly wnmi!?^ 68 to the assista nce of the vomen m crowded buses, and gives a metaphorical dig in the ribs to the BrUish workmen for their grumbling about transport. “Uncle Jim” is probvfiin Hrie r° f tho f®. fortunate gentlemen v ho ride to work in a Babv-7, and who gfne' fif) ° nly when the en-,-f| ne - them or when the wind is

too boisterous for the car to hold ttfl road. The complaint of the majority oi tr® British workmen, I hasten to assuiU “Uncle Jim,” is not that women occup. the seats in the buses —though some < them doubtless could regulate tne travelling with greater advantage--' J that school children are not catered • as they should be by the Transpo Board, and that their lack of cotiru** in retaining seats without Reference v their elders is causing a great deal inconvenience to adults. I am inclined to agree with your j.,, respondent, “Sick-to-Death,” vvho j gests that special buses should pe at specified times for school enii Furthermore, sir, I cannot under why the drivers of city buses argiven the same authority as bus drivers to remove *9 seats when adults are standing make them pay