Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 769, 16 September 1929, Page 8

Citizens Say

(To the

Editor.)

“THE STAIRWAY”

Sir, — You have published several letters about the notorious “Jacob’s Ladder” that is such a thorn in the flesh of Ponsonby residents. We have every right to demand that some remedy be effected. Apart from the labour of climbing these eighty-odd steps—it is no light job for elderly folk—there is the danger of a fall which makes the steps, tcf nervous citizens, a positive nightmare. The well-known steps in St. David’s Street, Dunedin, are nothing compared to these, ■which ascend in one steep- line without a break. What can we do? Is it any use sending a deputation to the City Council? Will one of those live-wire city fathers. Mr. Murray or Mr. Lundon, do something on our behalf? BUCOLICUS.

MR. SEMPLE AND HIS WORK

Sir, —

Your correspondent should be careful before he indicts Mr. Semple. I happen to know that the secretaryship referred to was forced on him, and he did the work for nothing and not, as your correspondent says, to keep another man out of a job, but simply because he was a friend of the workers. No member of the New Zealand Labour Party has done more for the workers than Mr. Semple. He is the outstanding figure in the Labour Party, and has sacrificed his life (often his freedom) for his comrades, some of them as ungrateful as your correspondent. Mr. Semple is certainly an idealist—a dreamer who dreams and an enthusiast who sees visions—but his intense earnestness no one can gainsay. As your correspondent has levelled a very serious charge, I have forwarded a copy of his letter to Mr. Semple, who will no doubt reply to it. HERBERT MULVIHILL.

WAKEFIELD’S GRAVE

Sir,— Mr. Coates has appealed to the Minister of Internal Affairs to restore the grave of Edward Gibbon Wakefield, in the Bolton Street Cemetery. Mr. de la Perrelle has given his assurance that the grave will be put in order and that the inscription will be rechiselled. This brings us back to the cold fact that nowhere in Xew Zealand, if we except his grave, is Wakefield commemorated. There is a memorial to him in the old Colonial Office in London, and not even a plaque to call him to mind in the land

for which he toiled so well. Prominent New Zealanders in this country and in England have begged that something be done in this direction. But here we are, with the Leader of the Opposition begging that something be done to improve the condition of Wakefield’s grave! It all goes to prove that we should possess a live body, as one of your correspondents suggested the other day, to see that all the great men in our history should be fittingly commemorated before it is too late. The next generation will have new great men to remember and it will be a thousand pities if those who figured in our early history are allowed to pass into the limbo of forgotten figures. ENOBARBUS.

NORTH SHORE DESTRUCTOR

Sir, —

I would like to endorse the complaints made in the papers recently and signed by the president of the Takapuna 'Westerly Area Ratepayers’ and Residents’ Association with regard to the awful nuisance caused by smoke and smell from the North Shore destructor. The president's remarks are by no means exaggerated. On the three days of this week, while burning was going on, a good west and south-westerly wind was blowing. The smoke and smell compelled the residents in the vicinity to keep all doors and windows shut and then it was impossible to keep the house free. Surely this sort of thing is not going to be allowed to go on? What on earth is the Health Department doing? It must know the conditions and must fully realise that the position of this destructor is quite wrong. "What is the destructor committee doing to protect the residents in the district. FRANCES M. BOSSONS. Takapuna.

CANTERBURY PROWESS

Sir,—

_ I for one refuse the unfair suggestion published in The Sun on Friday night, that the Ranfurly Shield, when won by Canterbury, was in the nature of a “booby prize.” This is a direct insult, and one which in Canterbury’s record is quite uncalled for. On the only occasion upon which the Red and Blacks won that trophy, it was by a margin of 11 points over Manawhenua in 1927. In 1928, with only a second line of defence, they lost to Wairarapa by only one point. Not much “boobyism” in that. As a matter of

(Continued in next column.^

fact, Canterbury’s performances in Shield contests will bear comparison, with any other province’s. On six occasions Canterbury has lost by the following margins. 2, 1. 13, 2,1, 5, a total all told of only 24 points, or an average of 4 points. Auckland’s margins in five losses have been 3, 15, 17, 30, 3, total 68, average 13.6. For Wellington, in six matches the losses are 4, 11, 10, 12, 4, 50, total 91, average roughly 15. In addition to these comparisons it is necessary to remind forgetful critics that Canterbury was the only province that could give Hawke’s Bay a hard run for it, when the latter was at the height of its glory. Canterbury was also the only provincial side to defeat the Springboks, which it did 6 to 4. should also like to add that certain Northern critics who at present are going into raptures over Elvy completely forget the fact that he is a player produced in Canterbury. In conclusion, I should like to say that a province which has produced close upon sixty All Black players cannot by any means be regarded as a “booby’’ among the provinces. The facts, sir, deny the charge completely, „ R. M. THOMSON. Sept. 15, 1929. MR. LUNDON AND THE CITY COUNCIL Sir, Everyone will, I feel sure, be pleased to learn that Mr. J. R. Lundon “is no .Testing Pilate” in his criticism of the city finance. It is all very interesting to have his long-drawn complaints about everyone but himself and to hear his voice, as of one crying in the wilderness, raised for the good of his beloved people. But it appears very poignantly to me that if Mr. Lundon would set his shoulder to the wheel of city muddle and get on with the job instead of waving his arms aloft and killing every genuine attempt to remedy an admittedly trying administrative situation, he would go far toward establishing himself in public favour. Mr. Lundon disagrees with the amount to which “over the counter” loans have grown in the past few years. Other financial critics in the city uphold the existing policj*. But they don’t make a song about it. So long as they are assured that the finances of the city are in balancing form they are content to have things run along lines which will secure reasonable return for the outlay occasioned; and so long as th< :• pic funds to meet the expended are adequately protected from financial bankruptcy. Why does not Mr. Lucc. >i d '-r----to business, instead of quibbling Th'.s has been going on for a. long : u . When Mr. Lundon cannot attack t Transport Board by disclosing ini »rn ation which may reasonably be regarded as confidential, he b latfl ri up > * - against the present Mayor. So far as publicity is cor. rned—about which Mf. Lundon complains —■ I believe the public i«* not very interested in what Mr. Lundon think* city finance; rather are they interested to learn what other people think about Mr. Lundon. _ PROGRESS,