CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 November 1922, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

A COASTAL i’UND. (To the Editor.) Sir, —In Friday’s issue of the News, your Puniho-Warea correspondent makes several references to what he terms the “pony-gig fund.” As your correspondent seems to possess inside knowledge, perhaps he can give some information on this subject that will be of Interest to numerous coastal residents whose humble “bobs” and “half-dollars” l«*ve helped the fund along. In the first place, now that the pony and gig have been handed over, I would like to know whether they are a straight-out gift, or are (merely held on trust by. the vicar’s wife for her own use and the use of any future vicar’s wife in the event of a change taking place? When the pony was purchased was It guaranteed quiet and suitable for a lady to drive? Did the gentleman from whom the gig was purchased let the G.F.S. have It at a “cut” price, solely on account of the purpose for which It was wanted,, as stated by “Your Own” iri‘ a previous issue? Is it a fact that the pony and gig have been sold at a much less figure than was paid for them? If so, why, and was thej sale made with the consent of the G.F.S., who worked so hard to raise the funds for the purchase of the pony and gig? Has the sale anything to do with the recent accident in which the pony and gig figured? If your correspondent can give the information sought he will be conferring a favor on numerous coastal residents who are wondering just how matters stand at present. —I am, etc., “INTERESTED.” Okato, November 3, 1922. PROHIBITION IN AMERICA. (To the Editor.) Sir,—Allow me to quote the following from the U.F. Church Record of last month: "The well-known American magazine, The Manufacturers' Record, has been conducting an inquiry Into Prohibition and has received hundreds of replies to a questionnaire on the subject from the most important manufacturers of America. The opinions expressed are remarkable and may be summarised intabular form, the figures being the percentages to total: For Prohibition in some form, 98.50 per cent.; against Prohibition, 1.50; for strict Prohibition, 85.50; for beer and wine, 7.00, against Volstead law or present regulation, 1.25; wants Volstead law modified, .75; advocates High License or Government control, 1.00.”—I am, etc., CITIZEN. Douglas, October 4. MR. HEATHCOTE’S LECTURE. (To the Editor.) Sir,—The pointed report of Mr. Heathcote's lecture in the town hall in Wellington has just reached me, and I would like to say t.iat I in common. I think, with the majority of Unitarians in New Zealand, deeply deplore Mr. Heathcote's action in becoming official lecturer in the beer interests. The matter or his Wellington lecture sorely shakes one s faith in him as a cultured man of letters. Surely he exceeds the bounds ot good teste when lie holds up to ridicule the physical disabilities ot his platform opponents; also his statement that he agree with the warning he received from his friends “that Christian Prohibitionists would stoop to any meanness or treachery. Under the heading of Christian Prohibitionists he would have to place practically every minister of religion in New Zealand and many other men and women whose work for the spiritual and moral welfare of the people is too well known to need defence. In sincerely hope the general public will not think Mr. Heathcote’s action is endorsed by his coreligionists. Unitarians are not seeking such an unenviable notoriety.—l am, etc., UNITARIAN. Tikorangl, November 4. (Published by Arrangement.)