PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 121, Issue 20256, 27 July 1937, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents, whose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility. Correspondents are requested to write In ink. It is essential that anonymous writers enclose their proper names as a guarantee of good faith. Unless this rule is complied with, their letters will not appear.

BRITISH-18RAELI81VI. (To the Editor.) Sir,—ln reply to Mr J. Morris, the number 666 is the translation In the Douay, King James and the Revised Versions, and also In the Greek text from the original MSS. A man can write anything in a marginal note, with a doubt to it. There are two Latin titles and a Greek one which you cannot apply to Nero, Caligula or Mussolini. The context of Revelation xiii and xvii is that the man with the number -666 will be “the head of the woman,” the eighth world empire, who will reign over all the kings of the earth. This prophecy will certainly happen in the future. —1 am, eto., HARRY GORE. Hamilton, July 24. FINAL PAYMENTS. (To the Editor.) Sir,—ln your editorial on Saturday you deal with the final payments for the season which dairy companies are announcing through the Press. I think it is to be regretted that, although regulations were made by the Government last year requiring each dairy company to conform to a •standardised balance sheet and announcement of pay-out, the Press announcements are still as confusing as ever to the average dairy farmer. The average pay-out over all grades Is what is required by regulation, and that is the information the -suppliers desire to know. I notice that the butter company in Cambridge adheres to the Government regulation, and although it seems to have the highest pay-out in the province, suffers in comparison with the Press announcements of some of its neighbours.—l am, eto., R. D. FISHER. Cambridge, July 26. CONFLICTING IDEAB. (To the Editor.) Sir, —The letter on conflicting ideas touched on some of the little problems that one hears being discussed in the street and wherever men assemble. The growth of imports, it seems to me, does not constitute any real threat to local industry. If they cannot carry on with the present protection, plus the high exchange rates, then why should all the consumers be forced to pay higher prices simply to enable uneconomic business to continue? Anyone would think that we can make | business one way. Our exports are i growing, and it follows that our Im- j ports are also advancing; The benefit i Is two-fold, and if anyone cares to ! study the figures with regard to overseas trade he will find that the increase in imports is about keeping pace with that of exports. For the five months that ended on May 31 the exports, when oompared with those of the year earlier, were up £6,600,000, and the imports were up £5,300,000. If Imports had not grown, then we would have had a balance of £20,000,000 in our favour, and what good would it have done? Trade Is the exchange of goods, and many countries are gradually coming to see that to restore trade the barriers must be removed or lowered. In a small way New Zealand has a part to play, and while Britain and the United States are negotiating a trade agreement, to set world trade going again, any attempt to raise higher barriers here would be pitiable. Mr Nash has neen trying to negotiate trade agreements, and they must mean giving exporters a fair market. If that is not done what other basis is there? We are going to hear a lot about rising costs of manufacture in the Dominion. It is not only here that costs , have risen. They are up at Home, and then British firms must face high ex- 1 change and high freight rates, so that the local manufacturer has ample protection.—l am, etc., •J. STRAIGHT. Hamilton, July 26. PRODUCERS, PRICES AND POLITICS (To the Editor.) Sir,—ln reply to “Kulak" in one of your recent issues, when he says that to meet the extra oost the Government would require to advance the dairy farmer the price of Is 5d per lb butterfat, I should like to know who Is to meet the extra cost? Does he expect the remainder of New Zealanders to carry the dairy farmer on their backs, the same as they are already carrying the wheat farmer? The present Government has more than stood up to its promise in the already fixed price, and no doubt it will be just as liberal for the coming season; but certainly not Is 5d per lb. This Government is pledged to consider the interests of all classes, and by paying an exorbitant price for butter-fat it would be disregarding the interests of all the rest of the community. The majority of New Zealand farmers are now well able to pay the extra cost, and no matter what Government were in power there would always be grumblers, particularly noi. 'the smaller farmers wiio are I lie biggest grumblers oil her. No; Ibis little bit of extra pay, extra holidays ami belter conditions to 1 lie working man. particularly the farm labourers, has fnirlv broken the heart of the majority * of big farmers, ll is tbo small farmer and Hie working man who pul Hie present Gnvermnen! into power, and it is the small farmer and Hie working man who who ar- going In keep it. I here. rf I lie Be form Godairy fanner would not he any better f>rr lb,-in 11.- is now—in fact, not ns The lale Reform Government committed political suicide and went into oblivion at the last general election, and so long as the present Opposition are carrying the dead body of Ihe Into Reform Government, about with them, they have got no earthly hope of ever getting info power again. New Zealand is not lo go back to Ihe old retrograde conditions. The present GovornAI.EX. BUYD. Auckland, July 24.

FOOTBALL MATCH. (To the Editor.) Sir,—One cannot help feeling: a little ■sorry for “Shopkeeper” that he is apparently unable to rise superior to the mundane considerations of £ s. d. It is about 16 years since the South Afrioans visited Hamilton, and in all that time “Shopkeeper” has been able to devote his Wednesdays to “business before football.” Now, because a disinterested party suggests a half-day off for an oocasion which is almost unique he protests. There is more than mere business or football in this. There is Imperial sentiment, and in these times, when national animosity is rearing its ugly head, the common citizen, as well as the leader in public life, should do all he can to strengthen the ties of Empire as the best guarantee of world peace; and how can any man do it better than by giving our visitors —many of them descendants of those who opposed us forty years ago—a record welcome? England may have achieved greatness in spite of being “a nation of shopkeepers,” but it was because her people realised that a nation, like a man, “does not live by bread alone.” — I am, etc., DISINTERESTED. Hamilton, July 25. GARDEN PLACE HILL. (To the Editor.) Sir,—So far two reasons have been advanced for the turning down of the recent Garden Place poll, firstly, as stated in the Council Chamber in an outburst which everyone regrets, and, seoondly, that vested interests are eager to buy up the freehold, remove the hill, and reap the profits. In order to prevent this and let the town share in the spoils, if any, the council proposes, by means of a vote taken over a restricted area, to raise a loan authorising itself to do the job. A bad exouse is better than none, but two bad ones—No ! No l Surely there must be something more substantial driving the council. If there is, then it should take the ratepayers into its confidence. If not, then may I draw its attention to a letter in the Waikato Times by Mr P. H. Watts, recall to the memory of the Mayor his repeated statement that the ratepayers would decide the fate of the hill, remind certain councillors of the words they used at the meetings prior to the recent poll, and leave it to them to cast about for a more suitable proposal. Surely the only fair, right and democratic way to settle the matter, seeing that the loan proposal was defeated, is to take a poll over the whole borough on a straight-out issue as to whether Garden Place and the adjacent properties on the hill shall be acquired for domain purposes or not?—l am, etc., TIM ROGERS. Hamilton, July 26. WAGEB AND THE MACHINE. (To the Editor.) Sir, —Having followed the controversy about wages and the machine carefully I should like to ask “Venator” to change his line of approach. He has mentioned machines and inventions in other countries, and some of us have no opportunity to check the figures—a thing I like to do, for figures can speak in different dialects. I remember as a lad hearing how a temperance lecturer was interrupted during a speech by a man who said that he had served in the army in India, and in a single hot season 50 per cent, of the teetotalers in his regiment had died. The reformer asked for particulars of the regiment, the year, etc., and checked the statement. It was correct; but then there were only two teetotalers in that unit. One died. Would it be possible for “Venator” to apply his theories to, say, the separator and the milking machine? For the time being, would he please forget the machine that makes razor blades and the cotton gin. My people are more well-informed on the working of the separator and the milking machine. Will your correspondent please explain how they have (a) rendered workers idle, (b) concentrated wealth, (o) prevented the abolition of poverty.

There are many more questions I should like to ask, but that little Instalment will do meantime. —I am, etc., H. BURNLEY. Cambridge, July 25.