OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

Wairarapa Times-Age, 28 June 1939, Page 6

OTHER PEOPLE’S IDEAS

ZONING OF CREAM (To the Editor.) Sir.—“ Digger Farmer,” in your Saturday’s issue, opens up a question of some importance. Today we hear a worse than usual growl from farmers owing to rising costs. The item of cream cartage is an uneconomic factor in farm costs. In the Wairarapa we have something like 30 dairy factories situated in positions most suitable for the several localities; yet every day cream carts from one factory are travelling many unnecessary miles passing and repassing one factory after another to lake cream to the one particular factory favoured by the farmer, though it is 50 miles away and a factory within a couple of miles of his gate, and 7 or 8 more factories passed en route. The Masterton factory, I understand, collects cream from as far south as Pirinoa. passing 7 or 8 factories to do so. The Mauriceville factory comes right through Masterton, I understand, as far as Featherston. The Eketahuna and Pahiatua factories come right into Mauriceville for their supplies. In every case the cream is taken past one or more factories quite capable of handling it. Imagine what a ridiculous waste this entails. All factories pay out about the same price and the standard of grading is the same; it is only the stupid prejudice of the farmer himself that allows this uneconomic cost to continue. In many cases the cost of carting cream from farm to factory is 100 to 500 per cent more than is necessary. Who pays for this waste?. I am, etc, FIFTY-FIVE. Masterton. June 26. OVERLAPPING OF CARTAGE (To the Editor.) Sir,—After reading the letter in your issue of June 24, written by “Digger Farmer,” re cream zoning, I quite agree with him that we should have the right of choice as to the factory we wish to supply. After all if it is the overlapping of cartage that is the trouble, then why not deal with the cartage, and leave the suppliers alone? It can be done. One carrier could pick up cream for one or more factories, just as well as a lorry coming from Wellington to Masterton dropping goods in different depots, thus cutting out the overlapping, and wear and tear of roads we hear so much about. It may not be generally known that where suppliers of cream have been so interlocked as in the Wairarapa, suppliers in some instances have been given the choice of one or two factories. This has happened in two districts —the and Manawatu. Well, Sir, if those conditions can be given to those districts, why should not this district receive the same consideration. I trust farmers will take this matter to heart, and fight for their liberty, as “Digger Farmer” and quite a number like him did some years ago. I am, etc, ANOTHER DIGGER FARMER. Masterton, June 26. THE PRICE OF MILK • (To the Editor.) Sir, —A number of people have expressed opinions ’ concerning the present high price of milk and I should , like to add my complaint to the chorus. I have two very small children and am at present unemployed, so that I ■ watch expenditure closely. We cut down as much as possible, but for the kiddies' sake milk is one thing ori which we cannot economise. We at present buy 18 pints a week. I find that at this time last year this cost us 3s 9d. This year we have to pay 5s 3d, an in • crease of 40 per cent. We are told there is a shortage of milk, but as I am no professor of economics, I canriot see how an increase in price makes old Strawberry produce any more. Also we are told that the farmer is not sharing the increase. Whfo is? Obviously the milkman. On the face of it, it looks as if the milkmen have united in an effort to exploit the public. Nor have they had any wail of “increased costs” to bolster up their case. Small boys can still, I gather, be employed for a mere pittance. I would like to suggest to the milk vendors that they carry their co-opera-tion in the matter of price a stage further and put their house in'order, before our lethargic Borough Council and the Government do it for them. With a little effort they could reduce the price to the public to a reasonable figure, and still maintain their present ratio of profit. To do this I would suggest the following methods of reducing their costs. (1) By a zoning system, which would prevent a tremendous amount of unprofitable running and cut down the time on the round. (For example in a block of foui’ houses in our street we have three milkmen and a fourth milkman, who lives just round the corner, supplies none of us.) (2) By using their association to determine the price to be paid for milk to the farmers and to pay no more. (3) By the use of a token system. These could' be sold by the shops and by the milkmen themselves. This would obviate the use of books, cut down customers’ arguments, eradicate dishonest employees and wipe out bad debts. I was told today that one milkman has accounts outstanding for as much as £l6. Of course we regular payers have to make this up. I trust that the series of letters to your paper. Sir, will have the effect of inducing our milkmen to do something about the price and that valuable fluid—milk .1 am, etc. MILK-SHAKE. Masterton, June 26. ——“ | PIONEER MINISTERS (To the Edito”.) Sir, —Your tonight’s Lansdowne correspondent, Mr A. C. Rowse (eldest surviving son of the late Rev William Rowse of Hokianga District Maori Mission fame) has naturally called attention to what was to him (being present at the recent Church of England Men's Society address upon early/ church history in Masterton and district) a slight, and pardonable, mis- ■ interpretation of its inter alia sectional reference to his reverend father’s eventual coming to Masterton as a resident Methodist Minister but in nowise its first; and, citing the name of the late Rev Mr Rishworth as being ■ the first Wairarapa-appointed minister 1 to these parts. Although stationed at Greytown at the time both he and his ; successor (the Rev Mr Dellow) used to include Masterton as portion of their then very wide circuit itinerary of

those days, it was the Revs Buttle, Smalley. Dukes, Isitt and others (including the Rev RowSe) who came more into prominent pulpit-review, as later years of Methodism (in Wairarapa) advanced. To better enable those not present at the recent address, and more especially your journal’s doubtless very many Methodist readers quite interested in this portion of it, I Would very much like you to permit me to briefly review some of the material chosen regarding the career of the individual whose name was as a spearhead to same.

“The Rev W. Rowse was born at Melstone, in Cornwall, in the year 1835, being later educated at a public school in Marazion, near Penzance. After a brief commercial interlude, he began to study for the ministry, its favourable nature resulting in his being sent out to New Zealand, in’ISSS, to further his ideal of entering into missionary work among the Maoris when his later training in New Zealand found (as it did) chance of his taking a fullest part. “He was sent down to Lyttelton for a couple of years, and again returned to the north where, at Auckland and Onehunga, he spent a similar period of intensive training for his next and most important post, that of succeeding the Rev H. H. Lawry, as Maori Missioner to act (in Hokianga District) in his already notable place. Here it was the reverend gentleman spent a life of glorious isolation among the Maori people over an immense territorial circumference of duty for the next 15 years —1862 to 1877 —during which period of .ministry he not only earned the. confidence and high personal esteem of the natives, but also the gratitude of the State, by his many settlements of prospective war-forays between European and native peoples in those now far-off but anxious days of early New Zealand settlement, and especially in those most isolated, but numerous Maori-peopled, parts.”

tn supplementing at first-hand from his own knowledge of the many incidents associated with his reverend father's mission days in the Hokianga District, at this particular period, no one could have better been welcomed to the C.E.M.S. meeting than your correspondent who now writes you—he being not only the eldest son of the family, but one gifted with a memory that is rare among individuals his age, and coming through experiences so well worth repeating al this, or any meeting of church Ijfe.

Being especially privileged to have been brought into this world under the skilful midwifery of the once triballycelebratcd Hareata (Harriett) Kahutara (widow of the war-illustrious Honi Hekc), and she the first to be a married ex-pupil of the Church of England Mission School under the Marsden regime in those parts, your correspondent, Mr Adam C. Rowse, was naturally as he spoke, the cynosure of all our eyes as he unostentatiously related how this initial start in life, among the Maori people in the Far North, later resulted in his tribaladoption as one later allowed to take part in the counsels of the elder brethren, at any time, in the presence of his father when one great Maori chieftain and another had cause . to seek his father’s confidential advice. The name of the great chief Mohi (Moses) Tawhai was especially dear to his memory as the ceremonial-pre-senter. to him, of a Maori emblem of authority which only such as 1 knew Maori characteristics and understood their ancient lineage and customs could fullest enjoy the never parting with (to museums or otherwise) as long as life itself remained so closely associated with the memory, as much as the actual gift itself. Thus spoke to the meeting the man who had once spoken to the greatest Methodist Maori missioner of them all, the Rev Samuel Ironsides, hero of the great Wairau tragedy of 1843, and of a thousand bloodless incidents, in Maori history besides. The death, at Greytown, of the Rev William Rowse (in the year 1899) and that of his equally brave and courageous young bride of 1862, who died at Petone a quarter of a century later than her husband (at the age of 91, as against his 64 (are memory-haunted laments in the history of Wairarapa Methodism) which their now side-by-side grave plots in the pioneer section of our own local cemetery (oft visited by their still-remaining considerable body of once personal as well as church adherent friends throughout Wairarapa) will not cease to be recalled as long as any such mourners as these can pay fitting homage to their memory in this signal way.—l am, etc., N. J. BENNINGTON. Masterton, June 24. LADIES’ HOCKEV RULES (To the Editor.) Sir,—l shall be glad if you will allow me space in your valuable paper to state my association’s dissent from some of the rulings and interpretations on ladies’ hockey as laid down by your contributor Mr Les. M. Murphy. In ’the first place, I would state that my association welcomes and fully appreciates any article on hockey that would be of material benefit to the game in general, and which would be criticism of a helpful nature to our umpires and those about to take up the onerous duties of umpiring. This is all for the good of the game. We do not, however, agree that interpretations which are obviously wrong and likely to confuse our junior umpires and players alike, should go unchallenged. I do not intend to refer back to past articles.... It is my intention at the moment to refer to his most recent contribution, in your issue dated Monday, June 26, in which he cites one instance which reads as follows: “It is not every player who knows that if an attacker shoots at goal, and the ball is sailing into the net over the head of the goalkeeper, and the latter raises her stick over her head ‘and hits the ball out, saving a certain goal, that the penalty is a penalty corner.”

Then your contributor goes on to say he has seen umpires give a penalty bully for this offence and even a goal. Now, Sir, the awarding of a goal would definitely be wrong and Mr Les. Murphy is right on that point, but when he states he has seen umpires award a penalty bully, the awarding of which he states is wrong by his reference to “a penalty corner only,” well it is now my privilege to inform Mr Les Murphy that the umpire’s decision in awarding a penalty bully was correct, and to substantiate my statements I would refer him to Rule 12, Paragraph (A): “Raise any part of her stick above her shouldei’ when striking at the ball, either at the beginning or at the end of the stroke.” Penalties, Paragraph (B): For any breach by the defending team the penalty shall be a penalty corner or a penalty bully (except in the case of "ordinary sticks.” When a penalty cornei’ only shall be allowed). A penalty bully should be given for a wilful breach of a rule, or if a player strike at the ball with her stick above her shoulder, or in any case when a goal most probably would have been scored but for the occurrence of the breach of the rule. In conclusion, I trust Mr Les Murphy will accept this correction in the spirit in which it is given and ask him to please make himself more conversant with the rules in future articles. —I am, etc., ARTHUR N. STUBBINGS, Hon Secretary, Wairarapa Hockey Umpires Association, Masterton. Masterton, June 26.