SUMNER BATHING POOL.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19668, 11 July 1929, Page 11

SUMNER BATHING POOL.

w THB inrron oy THE rne-i?. -.__ l am glad that so many have , J£, in jour columns in opposition proposed Bill the Council intend Z introduce into Parliament this B,s- ---• The supporters of t lie swimming Til must, either put their whole .scheme &• the people ot Simmer and kedJS2 or be prepared to face very strong in their endeavour to present ♦i> the borough one of those doubttul ■ff. that cost more to run than they So to buy- There if! 110 need to make this ooestion bo personal as to refrain from opposing it on the ground of breaking friendship, but, those who think that the Bill as it is now worded, mud secondly the pool, which is the ultimate aim of tho promoters of the pill should not he uroceeded with, «hoaid attend the public meeting and go- Yours, etc., **• .TNO. E. TAIT. gmpnw, July 10th, li'iM'. »o THlc r.orroit or rns press. Sir, —"Chee io" misses the point altogether, and I .suppose there are a few mor e like him who do not mind swallowing polluted water when bathing. Apart from everything else, the position for a swimming pool is far too pabjio for rowdy pool bathers. 1 am thoroughly in accord with all your correspondent "Spero Meliora" says about the so-called pool, as at times it is not a swimming pool at all —simply a dirty cesspool with a little green slimy water at the bottom. The whole of it should be reclaimed to make the roadway safer for pedestrian and motor traffic at this the most dangerous stretch of the roadway just; at the entrance to our beautiful seaside resort. — Yours, etc., COMMON SENSE. Stunner, July 10th 1020. *D TV* EDITOR Ok - THE PRBSi. Sir,— It was quite refreshing to read •CheerioV' letter in this morning's Pbkas over tins bath business. It is lime this spirit of "frightfulness" and abuse was ended. Did we not hare the •ame spirit displayed over the Redeliffs footpath in particular, but what of that uov/J Hveryono is satisfied, especially the users. Let us not be misled or side-tracked by the noisy few. The position in a nutshell is this: such a bath is needed, and the cost is being borne by private subscription, with no actual cost of construction or upkeep to the ratepayers. Why, then, all this eutarv? It is not concern for the residents"' welfare, but a deep-rooted grievance to tho powers that be. I trust this spirit will take wings. Let the hatchet be buried and all work for the common good.—Yours, etc., SEA-LION. Snmner, July 10th, 1929.