WAYSIDE HOARDINGS.

Press, 1 February 1930, Page 22

WAYSIDE HOARDINGS.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE PBESB. Sir,—Mr Clark's reply is really funny. In the first place he objected to the Editor of The Press characterising the destruction of other people's property as mischief; he seemed to consider it a kindly action. Then he stated that owners of hoardings had been asked bv the Canterbury Automobile Association and kindred bodies to remove them. I challenge Mr Clark to produce :<n .individual connected with any bodv in New Zealand who can substantiate his statement that representations have been made to the owners of the destroyed T enclose a cheque for £lO. Mr Clark to do likewise, the loser to pay £lO to sav, St. George"s Hospital. By Mr Clark's argument, when the Socialists hold a meeting and vote in favour of equal distribution of wealth evervbodv on reading a report of it in next morning's paper should immediately make arrangements accordingly Likewise with Prohibition. If everybody carried out all the demands made bv'others, we would have free beer, no beer, religious teaching in schools, no school* at all, and so on. We would soon have a Government that would erect road signs at the behest of 0.5 r»er cent, of its members, nnd then pull them down at the reouest of the other five per cent., sometln'nf like the Sydenham fence. I did not accuse Mr Clark of belonging to the destroyine partv. I do not require an alibi from Mr Clark, as although not personally acquainted with him, [ know him as a rmblic man sufficiently to be aware that he would not be a party to doing the deed. T understand it was the action of somo hooligans, who also threw tar over a shop in the locality.—Yours, etc., E. WRIGHT. January 3lst, 1930. [Wc have received Mr Wright's cheque for £lo.—Ed., The Pkeks.]