ODIOUS COMPARISONS.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 253, 19 October 1908, Page 3

ODIOUS COMPARISONS.

To the Editor. Sir,—l suppose it will be quite permissible to take exception to tlie lone of tlie editorial article in jour issue of the 14th re "clerical condemnation." Taken ou the whole, I should say it was neither decent argument nor good criticism, but a piece of swagger unworthy of the prominence given it. If you must make comparisons, isn't it.obligatory that you should do it fairly, as you certainly do not iu comparing the city population of the Home Land with the country population of New Zealand, On the question of physique the primary jlifferenee between yourself and me is this: I would not expect to laid tlie typical Irishman within a three-mile radius of College Green in Dublin or the Albert Memorial iu Belfast; 1 \#outd certainly neven look for the typical Scot iu the vicinity of the Glasgow Stock Exchange, but I will say without fear of contradiction that from the C'arse of Stirling to the Shetland Isles and from Balloch to the Hebrides will be found a type of manhood which will compare more than favorably with the Mew Zealand product. Similarly my quest for a typical Englishman would never tako me within the lew square miles of that country known as the city of London; and my conscience would assuredly prick me were I io point out as typical New Zcalanders that peculiar mass of humanity which one may see on any week day from noon till two o'clock pass, say, the junction of Sliortland and Queen streets, Auckland. Among the latter crowd there are scores whose stomachs would turn' at sight uf a respectable meal,

and I have witnessed them in Alii -i t Park unwrap lunch which would cost about as much as, and weigh less than,

the diet ascribed to the Chinaman. As to there being no poverty iu the Domi'i-

ion, well, llio public memory is not s< nliort Hint it lias forgotten the recen disclosures made by tlie Press re tlia niiitter| We are. of course, exceeding]; grateful (li.il tlie eoloninl contingent saved not only Little England, bul Ireater Britain by lighting tlie Boe iVar. Tliink, however, what we eouh lave done to stop "the cries of hungei hat daily rise, to heaven" hud we gol imc-ly intimation front the colonie: hat the 2011,(1(10 British troops \ve!'< laving high jinks and pleasant holiday: 11 South Africa. Your remarks in that onnection lead me to inquire wheth.'i l). this country there is any difference ichveen national pride and arrogance' I may be irne that the working-men o1 \evv Zen In ml are infinitely better oil ban those in the Old Country—oll till ither hand it may not; it is entirely matter of individual opinion, anJ uite legitimate (and with good reason) 0 differ from you. Anil then, von mow, die conservative Englishman ilow to learn the <-oloiii-.il rule thai entiment varies in converse ratio to he product of C s. d. In sport I make dlowauce for tlx l fact that the only ays on the colonial calendar are those onnected with the " All Blacks'" toul' nd that on which lYebli defeated 'owns, and it will be extremely disaplointing if those events are not cliron?led ill detail in the newly-issued "Hisorians' History." But you must agree I'ith ine that it is the most arrant liumaig to infer that the slock left ill X"Vv Zealand was quite up to the standard <-f he sample s ent Home in the AU Blacks, mil, in figurative language, to my mind dull day does not convey tlie implosion that the sun will never shine .ga'in. In concluding, £ will touch, .s you have done, on the methods adopid'to attract emigrants to Canada and \eiv Zealand, Some time ago I atended an illustrated lecture, by thd 'anadian .Minister of the Interior, and, I'ouhl you believe it? he really showed lictures of the winter there, and menioned that for about six months of the ear there was more than a possibility hat the thermometer might show 21 eg. below zero, lie did not invite his lenrers to "Clod's Own Country,'' "The Star of the Pacific," "The Ideal Home "f he Settler," and so forth, as New Zeaand advertisements now be'iore me do. 'he preeiso words used by him in sumning up were these: ''We do not 011-sr ■oil shares in Utopia, Ltd. The differ-

onco between tin; old country ami Hie. new olio is that wlicivas in the old country for every varum job there are live men, in Canada for every mail there are live jobs." 11l writing 1 do not desire to sav anything derogatory of Xew 'Amland, liut to point out that something laudatory might also he conceded to the Old Couiitrv.—l am, etc., KEW CHUM. [The article to "which "Newclimn" takes exception dealt with tile llev. Harper's reckless references to New : Zealand's "racial dccadenee' and "llev 1 inferiority as compared with the M<i- ' itlierland. The article endeavored to j show there was another side to the picture. If anyone deserves to he blnmod for making ''odious comparisons'' it is the rev. gentleman nnuieil. lie not only made "odious comparisons" but was guilty of absolute mis-state-meals. Tile article we reproduced was a reply to these mis-statements, not, an our correspondent, would have it. as I ail nnjiisl erilieiMU of the Motherland und its people. As a matter of fact > we have no «i-h to disparage the Old Land and the stock from which most ' of us ivi the colonies have sprung. "Rut ev; n colonials are not without their rights—not without a right, for instance. to rebut ill-founded and hnse eharire- made by biassed persons against them and their country, and to I do so without incurring the ridicule of narrow-minded men of the class to ■which '■Xcwchnm'' evidently belongs. Anyhow, is it consistent oil the part of our correspondent to charge us with, and condemn us for, making '-'odious eonio'ir ; ,-=eus'''nnd to immediately proceed to show how generallv inferior the Xew' is to the llritisher and fo infer how much belter are the fondifinns in Hie 01.1 Country than lliose obJ fainiiig here? -Kd."|