PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20495, 11 May 1938, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents, whose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility. Correpondents 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.

ANSWERS TO CORRESPONDENTS “Hamilton Born” —Already adequately covered. T. Magner—Too late for publication. “Householder”—Stresses the personal side. “Gee Jay Aitch”—Not under a nom-de-plume. THE SIN OF THRIFT (To the Editor) Sir,—l am rather inclined to agree with Mr John Sykes regarding the sin of thrift, although I would not call it. sin. T would call it the “mistake.” or the "fallacy” because if we had not worked hard and saved up in times gone by we should not now have to keep these sustenance and unemployed people in idleness in the towns. They would then have to get into the backblocks and do some useful work for their country among the blackberry and ragwort, etc. According to Mr Sykes, it is 40 years ago since he talked to a gentleman about the “sin of thrift,” and during that time either he or his forbears must have been practising thrift, otherwise he would not now be in possession of those “barns” of his in Victoria Street.—l am, etc., W.L.C. Maeroa, May 8.

“NO ORTHODOX METHODS” 'To the Editor) Sir.—Mr Snva.ce says lie is going to monetise production in order to get more and yet more money to finance with. As all taxes, in the final analysis, must fall on the producer, might we ask just how he proposes to do it and give us some details of the plan? According to statistics. I think it can be shown that production per head is now less than pre-war. and so far the Labour Government has. after two and a half years, done very little in increasing production, and production should be reckoned not in £ s d, but in quantity of goods. It. is no use reckoning values in a depreciated currency, because if are fewer goods to go round then we are all poorer. I think Mr Savage will find that under a competitive system he cannot get away from the orthodox method of raising money except by taxation, and the Government, by heaping up taxation, has proved that it has no faith in any other method. I was nearly forgetting that Mr Savage raised £11,500,000 by social credit; even this is quite orthodox, as it comes, as far as one can learn, from savings bank deposits, funds from Government Departments, extra note issue and overdrafts from the Reserve Bank—all orthodox methods. One of your correspondents states that the Labour Government has reduced debts by about £6,000,000. However, I think it can be shown that sterling funds have gone down by an equal amount.—l am, eto., VOUCHER. Taupiri, May 6.

PUBLIC DOQ POUND (To the Editor) Sir, —In May of last year the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty *o Animals requested the Borough Council to provide a pound for dogs. As nothing had been done the request was repeated last month. The town clerk replied under date April 28 as follows: “I have to inform you that the borough engineer has advised the council as under: ‘I duty informed the dog registrar that the council had authorised suitable kennels, but Mr Tabor strongly advised against this course at present. He states that it would be quite unsuitable to have the kennels at his own property, on account of the noise, etc., and at present he has them in Seddon Gully behind a property occupied by Mr Senior, in Goldsmith Street, and Mr Senior looks after the dogs. I have examined the accommodation at Mr Senior’s, and I am satisfied that the accommodation and location of the kennels are good, though perhaps one or two more kennels would be an advantage. I think if this is arranged for there will be no room for complaint.’ The council has instructed the borough engineer to make arrangements for the erectioh of two more kennels.” Accompanied by two of the society’s inspectors I visited the so-called pound, and I can assure you we were ashamed that a town the size and wealth of Hamilton should tolerate dogs being kept under such conditions. The locality is most unsuitable, being on the south-east edge of a gully and exposed to cold winds. As for the kennels f ?), most of them are old boxes with plenty of holes in them, and some having the floor on the ground, and consequently damp. No one who cares for his dog would tolerate such contraptions. One dog of the eight we saw tied up'' has marie his own kennel by scratching out a cave in the bank l Several dogs have the bare chains round their necks, instead of n leather strap. My blood fairly boiled when T saw the conditions. Some of the dogs are evidently good old sheep-dogs, and even if their owners have no further use for them they are surely entitled to lie decently housed before being destroyed. T would appeal to other dog-lovers to visit the place and make a strong protest. The Rorough Council should providp a pound where each dog would have a wire-netted enclosure in which it could exercise, with a kennel raised off the ground, and with a warm aspect, and water-tight. The kennels should be cleaned out and disinfected weekly and fresh straw or other bedding put in them. The cost of 10 or 12 of these enclosures would lie a trifling amount out of the £320 received in dog license fees last year. I would suggest that Mr D. D. Wilson's kennels at Hillcrest he inspected by the borough officials and something similar built.—l am, etc.. F. J. MARFELL. lion. Sec., S.P.C.A. Hamilton, May i.

COMPENSATING PRICE (To the Editor) Sir, —It is interesting to hear that the National Party have formally adopted the compensating price plan as one of their planks. After hearing Colonel Closey's very concise and convincing exposition of the theory last, night one cannot help wondering whether the poor old farmer is not going to be “had for a melon” again. At the last election he was promised “a guaranteed price.” He fell for it, and what did he get? A straight-out commandeer! This time he is promised a compensating price by a party which is avowedly opposed to all forms of currency manipulation: yet no one who has digested “the plan” can fail to see that it must involve costless credit. How else can it be financed? I therefore challenge the local organisers of the National Party to tell the farmer how they are going to reconcile the promised compensated price with their financially conservative consciences.— I am, etc., ONE OF THE MELONS. Te Kauwhata, May 6.

SOCIAL CREDIT (To the Editor) Sir,—l regret that owing to absence I have not been able to study the columns of the Times, and only on my return did I discover that Mr Hindle is still waiting to learn whether the bankers’ power to “create the means of payment out of nothing emanates from iegisation in their favour. I thought I had dealt rather fully with this subject, and had even invited Mr Hindle to conduct a few experiments in order to discover the truth for himself. 1 feel sure that if he will Just take the next credit note he receives from his grocer or butcher j (which he claims is “as good as legal tender’’), and will try to deposit It in his account at the Post Office Savings Bank, he will have proof more convincing than many columns of argument. As to whether “the extension of the laissez-faire principle to banking would remove all our difficulties,” I am unable to say. But if Mr Hindle will explain: (1) What he means precisely by “the extension of the laissezfaire principle to banking”; and (2) what he Includes in the phrase “all our difficulties,” I will think it over ! and let him know. ; Mr Hindle complains that a question | as to how Social Credit will solve the j land problem has remained unj answered. This is a great pity, but lie I really cannot blame the social ! creditors. There are a good many j land problems, and if he will tell me ! which one he refers to I will do my ) best for him. —I am, etc., ! G. HUNTER. I Horsham Downs, May 4.

THE HAWKER (To the Editor) Sir,—Your correspondent “Bass Broom” states that the Hamilton Chamber of Commerce desires “an Imposition of £SO a day to allow hawkers to trade in Hamilton suburban streets.” This statement is incorrect. The business men of Hamilton and suburbs are not concerned about the hawkers • and pedlars who are already licensed by payment of a nominal fee to the • Hamilton Borough Council. J We desire to protect the general . public from the operations of un- • scrupulous vendors who sell imitation | carpets, Jerry-built furniture, can- ] teens of junk, and numerous other j items at ridiculously high prices and ! then leave the district, and the buyers, ‘ lamenting. j The writer has correspondence on . the subject of “itinerant traders” which shows that we treated the subject as follows: “Protect permanent 1 work of skilled tradesmen and other 'employees in Hamilton”; “protect re- ; tailers who sell guaranteed goods at ; reasonable prices.” | I personally would not be a party to ' any action likely to prove detrimental ; to local workers, including Indians and Chinese, as mentioned by your corre-spondent.-*—l am, etc., R. CHALLINER. Hamilton, May 9. LOSS BY EROSION (To the Editor) Sir, —There have been some very ! heavy floods in the Hawke's Bay dis- ! triet this last five months. The i streams there flow from country that | has been ploughed for many years, | and land that has been ploughed gives ! up more soil than areas not ploughed, i The soil lost there would be at least : 8 per cent.., and the amount of soil left ‘over the flats is only a flea-bite to the 1 quantity carried to the ocean. ! The great flood in America twelve months ago, from figures supplied me ,by a friend there, washed to sea ; 3,000.00(1,000 cubic yards of soil, 'averaging the soil percentage at less than New Zealand flood silt. . | The papers place the blame on the farmer and bushwhacker for destroying tlie forest and the washing away of the soil. I landed in New Zealand in JB7i, and since then there have 'been many changes, different Govern.ments and land laws. The Governments cut up the forest areas and placed them on the market. The regulations were that the parties taking up the land must fell the bush, so many acres each year, or go off the : land. Now, Sir, do the critics think that men should have taken up bush , land and do nothing with it. or do they think that all they should have done .was to clear a space large enough to i build a slab where, and then stand and i adniir** the beautiful trees? When j men did not. keep even second growth icut they were looked upon as men of i no use to the country, through allowing land to go to waste. It is only recently that the public have awakened to the erosion danger. My cubic-yard figures were said to be misleading and would startle nervous people. Whether the figures were above or below I lie amount makes n » difference. The danger of erosion i< there just the same.—l am. etc.. J. T. DAYEV. Rangataua.