CORRESPONDENCE.

Press, Volume LVII, Issue 17104, 28 March 1921, Page 7

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE PROBLEM OF LITE. TO THT EDITOR OP "THE PRESS." Sir, —"Student's" letter in your issue of March 26th interests me, .because I too am a creedlezs and churchless student of the same problem. "Is man an irreconcilable compound of matter, ending in death, and of life, never—like its maker—ending at all, or what is he?" asks "Student." He expressly says that the Bible is the only test-book he knows that deals with the genesis of life, so 1 should like to bej: him (or her) to pet hold of a copy of the Katho-Upanishad, or the Bhagavad Gita, and see how the Indian handling of. the same subject appeals. "Never the spirit was born, the spirit shall cease to be never, . . . Drath has not touched it at nil.

dead though the house of it seems," says the Gita, while the Upanishad tells of tho immortal life embodied in each mortal, and points the way to find it. In attendance on the dying, and in the presence of death, this teaching seems to me to stand the test of concrete experience better than anv other I know. And it emphasises the fact that understanding of the spirit can only come by living the spiritual life, not by theory, speculation, or merely mental understanding, so that it would bid "Student" seek the answer in himself rather than in whatevet conclusion another may have reached. We learn tho meaning of love only by loving; we learn the meaning of life, on all its planes, only by living. But even a very little living of the spiritual life shows, I venture to thipk, that there is nothing "irreconcilable" between matter and spirit, but that the impsrishrblesp ritu-.] nature of man is, at its present stage, helped towards fuller development oy dwelling in perishable flesh. Full understanding of the problem there can hardly be. however, until perfect livin'has brought perfect development of faculty, so that "the pure in heart sees God." _ Would "Student" care .for the loan of either of the Eastern scriptures 1 have mentioned?/ If so. he or she is heartily welcome, and I add my name and address. —Your etc., t B. E BAUGHAN.

THE McKENZIE CASE. TO THE EDITOR OF "THS PRESS."

Sir, —I am much surprised at the action of the North Canterbury Hospital Board (1) in refusing to grant Mr R. S. McKenzie's request, that they admit his father as a case in the chronic ward, and (2) in offering liim instead a place in the Old Men's Home at Ashburton". As a ratepayer and one. who subscribes to the funds of the hospital .1 can only gather that the hospital, in sr>ite of the munificont gift of Miss Chalmers, has no home or place for chronic cases. If I —as might easily be the case—osli to have a relative admitted to the hospital I havo no desire to shirk payment. I am prepared to pay. I, however, want that relative to have such nursing and cat'e as may tend to improve his condition and perhaps, like Mr McKenzie, have no appliances in my own home to assure him of the treatment which the hospital is expected to and should give. An Old Men's Home is'no place for a bedridden man, and I haye the. best of authority for saying that the life, of such a man at a Home inmates are expected to do what tftoy can for themselves, is by no means a pleasant one. I was an inmate not long ago of such a home and a poor paralysed inmate sent on by the Hospital Board from this place to that had a very imeoiMqrtable time indeed. He could not fend for himself, and his tasks—bedmakmg, washing up, etc. —fell on the shouldei.s of another or others. With that magnificent Chalmers ward—a place set apart for such-cases —coming into commission, the Hospital Board in offering Mr McKenzie a home for his father miles and tariles a wny—rather crudged their <«»JThe MeKenzie family would gladly have paid-that I feel sure—it was really a matter of attendance and waiting which the average home of to J day, where domestic labour is well nigh impossib'o to obtain, could not offer, and the Hospital Board treated a natural and reasonable request in a veiy harsh and arbitrary manner. That it provoked a hot retort was not, under the circumstanoes, to be wondered at. The Board had been asked for bread—for which full payment would be made—and had offered a stone. The public, .however, have taken alarm at the tinwiso action of the Board, and want to know when the Chalmers ward will be ready for the use for which it was intended and why any shall ask for relief at the Board s hands for those sick or in anyways suffering,- and yet bo refused,—Yours, etc "' HOSPITAL ratepayer.

THE MORATORIUM. To THE EDITOR OF .<<fTHE PRESS.' Sir,—Whilst' fully appreciating t&e need for the extension of the mo' atorium to apply to money at call and deposit, I feel that it ia rather a one-sided piece of legislation m tlus respect: Protection is being given to firms who in some cases have been financing men into farm-s. The moia'torium will now give protection J bo tlalew. institutions, while they .the fams),nra permitted to use every pressure and m somo cases are scllmg-up farmers, whe have been caught in the slump. Should not the clauses of the moratorium bo also extended to protect '-he private mdividual aa well as tho luvgs funis. Yours, etc., gHEEPFARMER.

BRITAIN ANI> NAVAL POWER. TO THE EDITOR OF "THE PRESS. Sir—On reading your leader in Thursday's "Press;- I found myself thinking on your linos, and it seems to me that our branch ot the Navy League has forgotten that we occupy a somewhat different pusition from Great Bntain. "While tho Old Country has nothing to fear from Europe, we are na, so placid, and evidently Admiral LorJellicoe thinks differently, as vide Ins report. As long as England gets fivesixths of tho necessaries oi ute from, abroad, so long will she require a strong Navv to police tilie seas and protect nev commerce. In 1917 Germany " ier nearly destroved our commerce, and it is often said'by tfrse who know best that had she (Germany) increased her submarine menace at thac time she would be holding a different position today. It seems to me such a pity that, having held a supreme N uvy for upwards of 200 years, we should now become a back 'number, and at least wo might have said little on the until after the Conference to be held m June, when one of tJhe chief subjects, will be, what help are the Dominions going to give to the building-up of a supreme Navy, for such is what England most needs. One never knows what may be in tne mind of a foreign nation, or those wno control its destinies. When the Kai_sc v . who was an admiral in the Bntis-i Navy, was allowed in Kiel liafbour to assume command of our lleet for a few hours in June, 1914, it was not easy to forecast what would happen in tihe coming August, and in like manner one has to think what wouM happen if war was declared with ihe United States. Wc, of course, would not be allowed to usa the Panama Canal, while America could send her Atlantic Fleet to help her Pacific, and when one considers that we have I»ut one market in tho world, such would hit us pretty, hard. With regard to Japan, it would be an easy matter to conquer us or Australia. Every town of any size in New Zealand can be bombarded with the modern fceavy gun—& 12-inch will do the work—and we have do gun in the colony that could touch a> modern ship at. the distance iher guns would be effective.

As a West Countryman, living in the home of Drake, Hawkins, etc. (until I went to sea), I cannot but hope that England will yet command the sea, and that our mercantile marine jvill be safe. —Yours, dtc., E. ELIOT CHAMBERS. (Late) R.N. Lyttelton, March 25th. /