THE PEOPLES FORUM.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVIII, Issue 200, 24 August 1937, Page 16

THE PEOPLES FORUM.

From Our Readers to Our Readers. AERIAL DEFENCE OF NEW ZEALAND.

(To the Editor.)

The statements originating from the Prime Minister that New Zealand is prepared to spend money on defence wisely is one of the first fruits of his trip to the Old Country. He is the first Prime Minister to return with the information of what is wanted for our first line of defence and that the money voted by Parliament "will be epent on first-class equipment. The money thus saved will more than compensate the country, no matter if he 'did entertain a little. Some 18 months ago, through the columns of the "Christchurch Star," I drew attention to the lavish expenditure on the hangars at Wigram and to the fact that this was New Zealand's most vital aerodrome, yet these hangars, built at a cost of approximately £40,000, were built in a wide-open country; coloured white, they could be observed for many -miles, they constituted a target which could not be missed from enemy aircraft, but also" "were within range of any "enemy cruieer's guns"— that these hangars were built to house New Zealand's latest but obsolete aircraft demands a Royal Commission to inquire into the reason .why they were not built underground—as "no defence buildings" are invulnerable above ground against modern methods of warfare. The recent rumour of building. underground hangars was only 18 months after I had drawn attention to the white elephant at Wigram; that the Vildebecste bombers ordered and purchased after they were known to be obsolete is one of the gravest mistakes ever made. These bombers would be cold meat for any enemy aircraft. That they were purchased without attendant fighter*, -is madness. We are now informed, that. Hobsonville is not suitable for a defence aerodrome, owing to being within gun range of enemy warships, after spending thousands of pounds.on buildings. This fact is suddenly diecovered, yet in 1932 Hobsonville aerodrome proved a ' white elephant and unsuitable for a number of aircraft to use the 'drome at one time. . In 1928 Sir J. Salmon, Air Marshal of the Royal Air Force, made a survey of air defence in New Zealand. He made a report, which,, to-day remains pigeon-holed. Grant Dalton, whom Sir J. Salmon recommended to reorganise the New Zealand Air Force, was an airman of high repute. Aβ a ministrator and organiser he was with-, out equal, but no matter how he tried to make the New Zealand Air Force efficient, he was side-tracked by Parliamentarains. During 1932 to 1936 the New Zealand Air Force was, the laughing stock of every air pilot who had had experience of the high degree of efficiency in the Royal Air Force; chaos reigned supreme. The money spent in retaining GroupGaptain Hon. R. A. Cochrane is nothing compared with the service he will render to New Zealand defence and Treasury. The Hon. M. Savage wants "value for money." Well, he made a wise decision by handing the; air chief's job<Mbp one who knowi how to flyman; 7 : aeropSne off the The day has come when the war-tin^: pilots', will have to give way to the xijung pflots who are. returning to New Zealand after completing their short service terms of flying as pilots of the RoyaJ Air Force. It is hard on- the old- war dogs, but the young bloods have youth and the very latest knowledge of aircraft and technical data at their finger tips. Their training equips them to be "leaders," not fofiowere of those who, trained 20 years ago. The march of time goes on, and aviation is no exception to the rule of yesterdays being lost for ever. "Efficiency" is New Zealand's greatest and only defence. L. SAYERS.

IS BRITISH WORKER AS WELL OFF?

"The British worker is probably as well off to-day with hie lower wage as the New Zealand worker with his higher wage," thus Mr. J. S. Dawes, president of the Auckland Provincial Employers' Association in his annual address. Upon what evidence does Mr. Dawes base this assertion? I have just read an article in the "Listener" t by Sir John Orr, who produces official statements that, due to poverty, half'the population of Britain is undernourished, and "the diet of the poorest five million is deficient in every •respect." This five million contains 25 per cent of the children in the country. To feed a father, nursing mother and four other children adequately, and provide other necessities an income of £3 15/ per week is necessary, says Sir John. "Less than half the working class families of this size have an income of that amount." As everyone knows such conditions do not obtain in New Zealand. Every working class family in New Zealand eats butter at 1/3 a lb or more, and few have ever tasted margarine on their bread. In Britain margarine at 7d a lb or less is general in such homes, and butter at the same price as in New Zealand 'often a luxury. In New Zealand we do not have to feed U P military recruits before we train (them. In Britain they do, as witness tne "Star's" cable news; In Britain the Government will go in for taxes, restrictions and quotas on-food imports, for physical training schemes—anything rather than pay the workers a. living wage. And yet Mr. Dawes, pitting his opinion against the evidence of Sir John Orr in England arid that of our own eyes in New Zealand, says the New Zealand worker is no better oft;! And Mr. Dawes proceeds to predict doom and disaster as the result of. Labour's policy. Yes, the banks were going to close because of Labour's policy. Capital was going to flee New Zealand oecause of Labour's policy. T/ooley Street was going to boycott our butter because of Labour's policy. Labour's policy was going to make away with our savings. None of it has happened. Let Mr. Dawes remember that and collect some real facts before he again attempts the role of Jeremiah. PER ARDUA AD ASTRA.

FAMILIES.

Permit me, a mere male, and single, not interested in-the subject,to, ask those who have objected to raising families on the score? that they refuse to hayft them turned into so much'cannon fodder, to consider this: Doee the antelope herd because of the lion's depredations on _ its numbers, hold a meeting, and decide to disobey Nature's law of procreation— the very life of the herd? V VITA BRBVIS.

- INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY. I wrote my letter on the above subject because —whilst there are many searching for the fundamental truths of isuch matters—just now there is much being said and written of this that, from want of understanding, is misleading, and some that I am convinced is intended to mislead. Dealing with the subject from a basic angle, I was intent upon two points—the last one in particular—that all groups of thought split into smaller sections as the principles that brought them together are better understood and differences of degree and methods of expression find more room for expansion. In other words: Individual differences or differences of temperament then become assertive. And that, because throughout the world the "general" environment is becoming more pronounced, the people are drawing more closely together ind forming themselves into a governing factor that must soon become the most important one. When Mr. Woodruffe lumps the State, Fascism, Communism and Democracy together as the embodiment of a power that is the staunchest enemy of liberty, and ends by saying, "In the process of time the State will be a thing of the past, but life in society will go on perhaps better than ever, "by virtue of the power of free contract," I think I am justified in saying: The whole is very far-fetched and indefinite. Mr. Woodruffe ojects to the force element in society, and believes that section of political expression known as the State is responsible for it, and thinks, could the State be abolished and "free contract" allowed to operate, the situation would be ideal. ;Well, I would like to know precisely what Mr. Woodruffe means by "free contract," for I can only see- "contract" as a negative of "freedom." Human society is older than any system of government, but yet every system of government hae evolved from humane—and though I allow there is uneven reciprocal action between the people 'or human society and government—l cannot agree with Mr. Woodruffe when he says: "There is a vast difference between society and the State,", The force factor was the first expression of the rudest and crudest kind of government, and that factor will be with us so long that I don't think it will serve a. useful purpose to try to visualise a time and condition when.,it. will .not to some extent be operating. The first kind of man-made law was, that of Nature;:it; was habit or custoin.lThk was followed by laws to justify the cunning thief who stole land; bylaws- and efflcienfcorganisation to enable him- toxoid it.; i Thus law evolved. Not rules of life and conduct, allowances and restrictions hi the interests of the majority, but in the interests of the minority. That principle still operates. But there comes a time when by the intensity of the injustice such hurt is- inflicted that rouses the victim to a state of understanding. I cannot see how the force element can be removed from government until after it lias been removed from our economic llfe - WALTER SCOTT

WOMEN AND THE CHURCH.

Your correspondent "Vision" is trying hard to prove that the quotation "Let your women ' keep silence ", in the churches" is simply taken from the Talmud and not a direct command. There are scholars looked upon as very learned in the eyes of the wqrld who do not believe all the Bible and will not admit its inspiration. These men are adept at explaining away this text and the other. :i But I am thankful I can accept-what..the Bible says without question 1 : whether I can understand it or not. Ido that by means of faith, and that eaves us a lot of trouble. If the passage quoted by "Vision" is from the Talmud only, then can he explain why the same Apostle at a later date gives the same instruction to young Timothy, (chapter U., verse 11) ? I suppose that is'merely a quotation from the Talmud, tooP Your correspondent -saya the quotation is not found in the Old Testament," but if he only .reads the text properly he will see that Paul says, "as also saith the law," referring to Genesis iii., 16, "and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." If that is not "found in Old Testament law,' , then language means nothing. "Vision" wants to overrule the ordinances of God and place women on an equal footing with men in matters of religion, but -this writer is only anxious to do what God has required. This closes the matter as far as I am concerned- i C. W. TUCKER.

INTOXICATED

(By Telegraph.—Frees Association.) NAPIER, Monday. A farmer, Robert Sinclair Trotter, of Raupare, was eent to< gaol for 14 days ori a charge I:, of lieing intoxicated while in.charge of a motor car. An'.accident in which he was involved was witnessed by an inspector who was following and checking up on accused's behaviour.