Citizens Say

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 859, 31 December 1929, Page 8

Citizens Say

(To the Editor.)

THE CHARITY STAMPS Sir, — ' I would like to express an opinion regarding- the “charity” stamps for tuberculosis relief. I consider this to be a very excellent scheme toward helping a worthy cause and hope the sales will increase abundantly, but I do not approve of the stamps being issued minus the imprint of the King. 111 grant that the nurse’s head makes a neat artistic picture, nevertheless it means that if only one stamp is put on a letter, where is the King? He seems to have been stamped out, and I consider it a form of disloyalty although unintentional. I hope to see an improvement made. Why not have a portrait of the King on the right and the nurse on the left, and in the centre a cross bearing the words, “Faith, Hope and Charity”? Why are they called “charity” stamps, when so many people shrink from the idea of accepting charity Why not “mercy” stamps? it is a merciful act from merciful people to try to stamp out such a dread disease by increasing the stamp sales, but I cannot help hoping for a change of design. WELL-WISHER. OUR SALES IN WOOL Sir,— A message from Wellington published recently which announced that New- Zealand would lose approximatelv £5,000,000 through the refusal of Bradford buyers to extend the wool sales season, is more serious for New Zealand than might at first appear, fetrangely enough, there is a message front London in the same paper which invokes the Dominions to contribute £25,000 a year to a fund for the improvement of fleece and mutton. It seems to me, a casual observer, but one interested in the progress of the Dominion, that there is a lamentable lack of the co-operative spirit in these two events. The Home authorities controlling meat and wool are seeking the assistance of the Dominion to make for a better product, but on the other hand those who are vitally concerned with the marketing of our goods are refusing point-blank to meet New Zealand upon a vital request—a request spelling affluence or poverty for this country. It is a pity that the -wool committee here did not decide for itself and offer the -wool at later sales, taking the risk of a fair demand. I be-

lieve that if this had been done, there would have been a cancellation of sail! ing dates on behalf of the Home buyers, who would have stayed to get the best out of the market. If we are to be ruled by a few people like these, sir, there is nothing to indicate in whose hands our prosperity will be in very short time. PRODUCER. empire free trade Sir,— _ The recent gesture toward Emmie Free Trade in the Old Country raises the hope—-a faint one—that if we adopt Imperial Free Trade we may go further afield and have (as far as we are concerned) universal Free Trade. When England adopted, nominallv, Free Trade, it was not done through any evolutionary political change. Dire inaustrial conditions prevailed. Trade was practically wrested from the Government then in power. Norman Angel], now an M.P. for an English constituency has recently been devotd6 A L- 01 tl ff le to England’s fiscal policy. A Free Trader, and an idealist, he warns the British people that ImUn r rfv * r n e Trade is long overdue. Further, he sees m tariffs causes of racial irritation, and factors that heln in the buttressing of what he terms r'tyi-,- lri , IlqU.ltSus 1 lqU . lt S us capitalistic system.” -England, today, is in the grip of a world slump, and her leaders in political thought are desperately looking for f- ou ~ oi , th ® maze Should not we m New Zealand render assistance In bringing about Empire Free Trade” Angell says the world today is seething with discontent among the workers states, in referring to tariffs: "The universal notion that while it benefits us to take the foreigner’s money, it injures us to take his foods paralyses the economic efficiency- of Satimf’” and may yet ' vr eek our civilherbert mulvihill. CRICKET PROFESSIONALS Sir, — Your correspondent, “Square Leg” presents only one side of the case h? S ? ys that “tt would probably be better for all concerned if professionaj coaches were not played in Plunket Shield matches.” Is not the cricketing public, which does much tS Seso coach?, 16 , *"Sa E em?n? ffi tnese coaches, to be consideredMen

worthy of their places in English county elevens are to be seen at their best in representative and Plunk"Shield cricket, and further, it 15 during such fixtures that the public in general has its only chance of getting something direct in return for i* B outlay in the interests of the gameGranted, Bowley and now Wensley have played big parts in provincial victories for Auckland, but have not the professionals of other associations been of great assistance to their teantf also? Because two of the other New Zealand major associations happen 5, have no professional player-coach* this season, it does not follow thv Auckland is to be penalised for looking to the- future with true enterpdj Further, it is safe to say that if * n > team had to rely on the services 01 one man to win matches it would noj get very far in any competition. Here* looking forward to seeing A. F. WenJ* ley in actior. against Canterbury. OLD TIMER. *