PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 124, Issue 20744, 2 March 1939, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION

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

STADIUM FOR TENNIS?

(To the Editor) Sir—Now that the town planning experts have agreed with the council that Boves Park is an unsuitable site for a town hall, why not make it into a tennis stadium? If it were paved with modern resilient materials and protected from the wind by the surrounding terraces and lighted with modern lights, it seems to me that the tennis season could be a lot longer than it is at present, and there would not be need to stop play because the grass was too wet —or because it was too dry. A sufficient revenue could be derived to pay the cost of the construction. May I ask at any rate whether the tennis enthusiasts think there is anything in the idea.—l am, etc., PLAYER. Hamilton, March 1.

SPORTS STADIUM

(To the Editor) Sir, —One point that 1 feel would greatly assist the present battle over this sports stadium is a knowledge of what the Rugby Union is going to do. Is the Rugby Union pursuing a policy of masterly inactivity, allowing another body to be the chopping block, for any particular reason? Has it any definite plans for the future of Rugby Park? Would future Rugby crowds be catered for at the future Rugby Park? If so, then the only argument in favour of Galloway Park is punctured, for nothing but Rugby would get out a 30,000 crowd in Hamilton. I hope this letter will he the means of forcing an expression of opinion from one of the strongest bodies in the town.—l am, etc., INTERESTED. Hamilton, March 1.

INTERESTS OF YOUTH

(To the "Editor) Sir, —Mr Fraser’s views in to-night’s Times are so wide of the mark that one is tempted to think that he is angry at the turn of events, or else that he is woefully ignorant on the subject, lie sends a clarion call to the school authorities and schoolmasters in the borough to assist to keep the school children on Hinemoa Park. Well, here is my solid backing. I fully agree with him on that point. I want to see Hinemoa Park a modern playing field, not only for school children, but for all children and adults too. There never has been the slightest attempt at any time to do anything else but that. I am not so anxious to emulate bigger countries with their marble and stone edifices. I want to do something for Hamilton that can be done by Hamiltonians at a reasonable cost and that will be suitable for very many years. One would think from Mr Fraser's remarks that his committee was responsible for the interest taken in Hinemoa Park. That is not so. The agitation for better playing areas was begun at the Borough Council table, and it was the efforts of the council that caused the Domain Board to agree to spend a sum of about £125 and the council to do likewise as a beginning to put that field in order, and I think I am correct in saying that if the Domain Board had agreed to vest that property in the council the job would now be on the way to completion. • Mr Fraser has told us that in 1932 the Domain Board most generously handed the ground over to the schoTfis for a sports ground. Well, this is 1939. Will he tell us just what was done in that seven years to make it habitable? There is not one vestige of sanitary arrangement on the ground. Did he expect those boys and girls to mix under those conditions? No, of course he did not, and his clarion call to-day is just an attempt to hide the inactivities of his grounds committee. Is it not a complete answer to all questions, when after approximately thirty years of franchise by a hoard set up for the purpose of providing and caring for the sport and health of the district that there is not one up-to-date ground in Hamilton, a town verging on a city? Mr Fraser’s jibe at the Hamilton Athletic Association is ill-timed. That body consists of a number of selfsacrificing men and women who are working hard in the interests of health and fitness and who want at least a home to give health to those very children who, Mr Fraser says, will not be allowed there. Admittedly there will be only one football ground there if a stadium is built. I would prefer to see football kept off it altogether, but school football is played on week days and there is plenty of room on Rugby Park for it. One would not like to see children playing football on it under the conditions which obtained last year, when junior teams at times played ankle-deep in mud and water. However, il is good to get the committee members’ views, but they should not get annoyed when their schemes arc criticised. You sec, Sir, Mr Swarbrirk says he first envisaged a stadium nine years ago, and his report comes down now. Mr Fraser say s his interest is in the children, although nothing has been done for them during the seven years the ground has been set aside for them, their annual sports have all been held on other grounds, the High School on their own grounds, and I am assuming that the Technical School will hold theirs on their ground, on which so much money has lately been spent. No. Mr Fraser, the primary and secondary schools will not be "jostled off the park. Un the contrary, they will he welcomed and, I am sure, given all the assistance at the disposal of the Hamilton Athletic Association. Remember the school children of to-day will be the athletes to-morrow, and the governing citizens of the future. I want to see them get every chance to be fit, strong and graceful. Perhaps Mr Fraser would answer two questions for me. As the bulk of tiie money to provide playing fields in Hamilton will come from Hamilton (and I think we should pay the lot): 1 Why was a report on the question not obtained from the borough engineer: 2. if a report was obtained, why was it not given lo the public alongside the report of Mr Howell, assistant county engineer? Was there a special reason, and if s’o. what was it?—! am, etc., A. J. DENZ. Hamilton, March 1