OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 31 May 1939, Page 3

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

DEFENCE ENROLMENTS (To the Editor.) Sir—According to your issue of today's date, the local response to the Prime Minister’s appeal for volunteers for the New Zealand National Military Reserve was very poor, the total number of enrolments to date being only 38, but it afforded me some personal satisfaction in that I did not get my corns trodden on when I went to fill in my enrolment form at the Post Office last Tuesday.

It is interesting to note some of the reasons for abstention from enrolment. One young man of the mature age of 21 years, stated that he had had enough of that sort of thing in the cadets, while another stated that he did not like the personnel of the local military unit. They say “God Defend New Zealand," I say God defend us from ourselves—l am, etc., TIM HAGAN. Masterton, May 26.

LEADERS & RANK & FILE

(To the Editor.) Sir— As one who has considered the appeal of our honoured Prime Minister (Mr M. J. Savage) I consider that those people who say the Government have not gone far enough in defence of New Zealand, should at least realise that there are other people in this country who have opinions as well. My contention is that we hear plenty from the leaders or so-called leaders of public opinion but very little from the rank and file. If it were not for the rank and file there could be no defence. Now, Sir, I would like, through the columns of your paper to give some opinions of one of the rank and file who is vitally interested on this subject. I will do so in the following way: (1) I strongly object to the Conscription Act still remaining (I understand) on the statutes.

(2) Criticism from persons who are over the age of service, 55 years, or who have not served their country in previous troubles. The reason for this is the fact that a lot of people who know there will be no chance of them ever being called upon, or who have never helped the country when they were of military age, feel quite safe to criticise and air opinions of what should be done. (3) As I see it, anyone who joins the Territorials does so on the understanding that they do it for national defence, but while the Conscription Act still remains on the statutes they can be called for overseas service at a moment’s notice, which is one of the reasons why the registration for Territorial service is not as successful as it should have been.

I have a son 18 years of age who would join up but for the fact that I am against conscription for overseas service. Wipe out the Conscription Act and there would be a rush to register for home defence. If the above Act was repealed and one substituted conscripting all persons from 18 years to 55 years it would, I am sure, have the support of the majority of the rank and file. As an Anzac who served for just on 4 J years and one who has already registered for service for home defence, I hope this letter will come under the notice of our M.P., who, I am sure, will find in it food for thought. In closing, I hope everyone who through the daily papers or any organisation or meeting, makes a statement condemning or criticising the defence measures should at least be asked if he has registered or has he seen service in past years. —I am, etc., 2—BAR, N.Z.E.F. Masterton, May 25.

WOOL PRODUCTION (To the Editor.) Si r — I notice in your paper of even’date that Mr. Lloyd Hammond, who was chairman of the Farmers Union conference, says, “We can go home knowing that we have done a good job of work.” If sowing seeds of doubt and mistrust in any one reputable organisation is a “good job of work” then he has certainly succeeded for in a newspaper report of May 26, I read where he states, among other declines, a drop of 71 million pounds weight in wool production. In tne same paper, two columns away, is a report from Christchurch of the resultsof this year’s wool sales for New Zealand. This report states that the 193839 wool sales resulted in an increase o 92 167 bales of wool over the 1937-38 season. Now, Sir, the average weight of a bale of wool is nearer 4001 b than 3001 b., but taking 92,167 bales each of 3001 b. this gives an increase of 27,650,lOOlbs. What answer, Sir, has Mr. Lloyd Hammond to these figures ana which are we to take as the correct ones? There is certainly a substantial drop in monetary return when comparing the 1938-39 season with the 1936-37 season, but that can be accounted for by the big fall in prices and definitely, very definitely, not in a drop of production. It is only a difference of some 3j millions pounds weight of wool but just whose report arg we to believe and whose to take with a grain of salt? Personally I prefer the Christchurch figures —I am. etc., WHAT NEXT? Masterton, May 27.