CORRESPONDENCE.

Auckland Star, Volume LI, Issue 119, 19 May 1920, Page 10

CORRESPONDENCE.

HARROW HECK MILITARY HOSPITAL. iTo iho Kdttor.i Sir,—Tho letter in Monday's " Star " under the above heading, and to which the signature of Uie Uev. Greenwood, C.F., is appended, may give the people of Auckland the erroneous impression that nothing is beiuj; done from tl recreational and vocational point of view for the patients at the above-mentioned hospital. .Since the majority of th? patients arrived from featherston early in January, the V.M.C.A., under ■•uncle." and the Salvation Army, under Urifj. Stone, have lieen tireless iv their efforts to look utter the cuinfort* of the men. On account of the men's disabilities every effort H made to prevent their "knocking about a little," and they .ire extremely enthusiastic on the various vocational claswM run by the Defence Department. Workshops in' engineering, carpentry, boot-repairing and handicrafts have been established, and one vi=it while the classes are in progress trill give a casual observer an idea of (he value of th'i work done both from an occupational and a curative aspect. Many attend town classes free of all expense: a large number of books of ,i technical nature have been issued free of charge, and a large collection U held in the district olfice. Kitchener Street, for distribution Oβ required. —I am, etc., A. UOYVTE find Lieut.), Vocation Ollic-er, Auckland District. NORTHCOTE BOHOTTGH AFFAIRS. ITo the Killtor.) Sir, —There seems to be -som3 misconception among the ratepayers of Northcote as to the real bone of contention between the Mayor and Councillors at la>t meeting, us reported in your columna I last Wednesday. In any ca.-e it is only fair that ratepayers should understand who is to blame for the council business being brought to a standstill in this manner. The councillors will consequently be obliged if you will permit them to make the following explanation: — The minutes of a meeting held on the J Kith April duly came up at the following meeting for confirmation but were at once challenged as incorrect liy t".vo | councilloTS, who were alleged to have | respectively proposed and seconded a motion. This they nlbsolutely deny j n&vm** doiw*, onrl in tins t lit! v it re ported hy all of tlie councillors who were present except one: but the Mayor, notwithstanding the fact that only liimself and one councillor voted, insisted upon , declaring the minutes confirmed '"on the I voifPS." , He refused a division when | demanded, and immediately signed the ' minutes in a most arbitrary manner and in spite of loud protests from councillors. j As a further pnrtest three councillors i ■walked out of the room. At the next : meeting following very similar proceed- | ings took place, the Miyor attempting to \ force the confirmation of minutes I througn. hut he was defeated, a= the

rouncillors present refuainß to Temain tlie meei:n<: lapswl. Tlie councillors arc. of oourae, aware that if minutes are properly confirmed and sifrtied they cannot be altered, but tlie minutes in f)ue?tion were not eonfinrtpd anrt were wrongfully signed, n determined effort bcin;; made by the Mayor to force the hand of the council in the matter.' The Mayor lias on several occasions in a most autocratic manner refused to allow a motion to be put to a, mectinp. and councillors arc determined to make a firm stand to maintain their rights.—We are. etc., W. E. RICHARDSON", Deputy-Mayor. W. K. A. .STEWART," WM. P. ROBERTS, D. C. ADAMSOX, WILU-VM KINLEY, GEO. fl. I.YON, D. R. DAVTES, W. SPEXCE, Councillors. REV. JAKES AND THE REFORMATION. (To tbe Editor.) Sir,—The Rev. Albert Thornhill has •ent you a lengthy letter; but ho has not even referred to the sentence of which I complained, viz., that 1 "seemed to regard the Reformation as a great mistake, especially m so far as it led to a breach, between the Anglican and Roman Catholic Church." I {lave disowned that opinion Rimply and unequivocally. May I invite Mr. Thornhill again, in the interests of juatiee to mc and of fairplay in controversy, to deal with that specific sentence simply and unequivocally?—l am, etc., PERCIVAL JAMES. St.. Mary's Cathedral, May 17. (To the Editor.) Sir,—Tlie. Rev. A. Thornhill is evidently endeavouring to retreat, under the shelter of a cloud of words, from an untenable position. In liis recent sermon he asserted that the Rev. Percival .Tames "seemed to resnrd the Reformation as a great mistake, especially in so far as it led to a breach between the Anglican and Roman Catholic Church." He does not withdraw this assertion in his letter, and yet he fails to quote any ■worda used by Mr. James that would justify it. He makes a garbled paraphrase of Mr. James' quite lucid statement, witS interpolations and interprer tations of his own, and then contends that the tfliallenßcd assertion is a fair deduction from this radically inaccurate version. Such controversial methods ftro deplorable. What right has Mr. Thornhill to suggest that Mr. James rejects Che "priesthood of all believers." or that Mr. Jaratw desires "to go behind that Protestant principle'? In my last letter I affirmed that Mr. Jame» thinks that, the Reformation -'should now be carried a further stage, and contends that the 'dead hand' should not hn allowed to bar the way of progress am) \ reform." By some mysterious mental I process Mr. Thornhill "makes himself be- ] lieve that Mr. James may mean by the : "dead hand" th E Reformation settlement, and by "progresß" lie may mean reunion with Rome; but in order to reach this deduction he mangle* my sen- i tenee by carefully omitting the all.; important words "carried to a further stage." Even Mr. ThornhUl would lind it difficult to imagine the possibility of I going back upon the Reformation by | carrying it to a further stage. Mr. Thornhill states that his sermon "was an attempt to show that Protestantism is of the essence of the Reformation. and that anyone who repudiates it necessarily repudiates the Reformation." But Mr. ThornhUl knows quite well that one may think that the word "Protestant" w '"an ugly, misleading, unfortunate term" without repudiating the Reformation. Many staunch Protestante hold that t/he.word ie ambiguous «nd inadequate.—l am, etc., ■ N. E. BTTRTOX.

CHILDREN AND INFLUENZA. (To the Editor.) Sir, —We have influenza again amongst us. Aβ a result the schools are and have been closed for some time. The children whom thia cloeing is to benefit are daily allowed to go to picture chows, where they are crowded in hallo, none of which are, it must be admitted, perfectly ventilated, and in which, if anywhere, the influenza bacillus has the beet chance of getting to work.—l am, etc., SENEX. Mr. Cotton writes to similar effect. A.R.C. AND PUBLIC. (To tie JMitor.) Sir,—lt is up to the public to show the club responsible for this unfair punishment of the jockeys Hewitt. O'Shea, and Kae that we, the patrons of the club, demand fair play, and to accomplish this end simply stay away from Blleralie for one race day. By doing co we would not only see these men get a fair dea', but we would also have a chance of asking the A.R.C. for a little more consideration for the public, sucli as the provision of gates opposite the Derby stand to allow people, especially ladies, to £et „„ lo t i, e i ns i<i e of the. cour<e -\vith:>tit having to go on their hands and knees to creep under the rails. Further, it U time the club reduced the charge of admission to the course to one shilling.—l am, etc., F.J.A. [There is a widespread misconception with regard to the disqualification of these three jockeys. It was not imposed by the A.R.(\,>tuit by a District Committee, which i s representative of racing in the Auckland province.—Ed.] CONDENSED CORRESPONDENCE. Cha*. Morris, advocating the duty of the public, to assist in subscribing to" the Olympic Fund, as Auckland promises* tn be never so well represented, nsks: "Where are all the kings of racing, who *ppnd thousands a year in horseflesh? Why not throw in a little towards building up a nation.''