CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 2 October 1915, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

PUNIHO MATTERS. To the Editor. ■Sir, —Mr. F. J. Cowling seems to have twisted himself into a mad knot of utter rot by asking why you had not sent a reporter to this factory meeting. Now he Qnds out that the circulated report is not believed by anyone outside of the meeting, as it is well known that all too many false reports have been circulated around to try and damage a certain individual and other settlers interested. As to anyone inserting clauses into legal documents, after duty stamps have been affixed and registration paid, this has not been done by anyone, and if Mr. F. J. Cowling, or any correspondent, will accuse any person of doing this the libel laws will be found in working order, which, as we know, arc expensive things to deal with. Personally, I think Mr. Cowling ought to be pitied, as he tries to put his head in a noose, and would have done so only that you have scrapped part of liis last libellous correspondence, which also shows that the editor of the Daily News is not taking any chances.—l am, etc. SAN TOY. Puniho, Sept. 30. THE NATIONAL PERIL. (To the Editor.) Sir,—Evidently, according to your editorial to the letter signed "Frank Aroa," in Wednesday's issue, and to "Another Subscriber's" epistle in Thursday's issue, both "Frank Aroa" and myself' ("Honor to Whom Honor is Due") have wrongly interpreted the meaning of "Subscriber's" letter in Monday's issue. Now, sir, if "Another Subscriber" wishes to thoroughly convince the renders of your paper that he is not one of the "ironbarked pumpkins" that are left, he might explain, through your columns, how we can deduce any other meaning from "Subscriber's" letter than that ho is shirking his duty to his country. Firstly, I would advise liim to use a little more soap and water, mingled with some elbow-grease, when washing himself, so . that he will be able to see when daylight breaks every morning, for he is two days behind when he slates that "Subscriber's" letter appeared on Saturday last. You advise your correspondents ' to read "Subscriber's" letter again, and 1 then they might fathom the subtlety of its contents. On reading it over again I can only say that the subtlety of the letter has got both yourself and "Another Subscriber" in quite a different form than it strikes me. However, I hope the S matter will soon be cleared up by our worthy and learned friend "Another Subscriber." Thanking you in anticipation,—l am, etc., HONOR TO WHOM HONOR IS DUE. ' Auroa, 30/9/15.