CORRESPONDENCE.

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20788, 23 February 1933, Page 7

CORRESPONDENCE.

Pf|;i;; r ;V' : ♦ ■ „. noQ dc.»tß who do not. comply with i out i n last column of our «•**? J>tg* will excuao ua from noticing '.'jjjjjfr J9lt«r». fljg municipal elections. m rue EDITOR OK THB PBE33. gir,—l, » s a citizen, ta ' io strong ob- . to tho attitude being adopted taTour Citizens' Association when it if soffgcsted that tlio Mayoral seat ► uld not !j0 coutcsted - Tlle maiu \L im is, can tho sitting Mayor cio *ticß to two jobs ? We, as citizens, '"freed some considerable time ago that 31, a 'condition of tilings wa ß infTrablfl Should wo, us ioynl memwS of tho Citizens' Association, now tend for tho contraction ol an adattitude by irresponsible mem- !• HIT who for tbe time being are ending such a procedure? Personally I am convinced that with- ■ ra-ks wo havo able and capable tho t-an pl«c the whole ®t the time required to do .jus- ' !L to all concerned within the muniiwitv of Christchurch, which will, re- , K politicians from a dual obligaSir McC'ombs (rumour says) will ~!X» a corftestanfc for council honours. Ills will be conclusive evidence of my ;zL n tion that our association should 'Sfforth a candidate for Mayoral * £ «rV Messrs Acland, Hayward, Andrews. and Beanland should jftdwl. Personally T feel sure SJTanv one of these people can pre-. ' X farther "Red Fed" control of : Lit council—Yonrs. etc.. 1. LOYAL CITIZEN, fobraary 2*2, 1933V' NEW ZEALAND BUTTER. '•; TO T HK ZDITOB or this P8833: :-l gj r —Could not something bo done '-with Ward to putting New Zealand . batter up in packets fully labelled. ' ''jfow that a glut is on, surely somecould bo done to create a de'Cand. If it would be possible to put butter up in ilb, |lb, and lib I feel sure that a big demand "'iwuld soon be created. It would save -Tteemendous amount of handling and prove very popular with shop- ' bMDers as it would save a lot ot +S>le Surely tho extra cost would than Wpaid. Engli.l, People Him the small package, and lib car , might not be altogether satistacg Sff largo part of th<> working jZ ready money trade.—Yours, etc., j PROGRESS ENGLISH. February 22, 1933I'NBMPLOYED ALLOCATION MONEY. 70 TUB EDITOR OF THB FKESB. gir—The little discussion on this naertioa between "Stood Down on Halfand myself demonstrates two an- ' ufonutie points of view. I leave it to t:Zr readers to decide which point of. * view is the more sensible and practical. ' Your correspondent's point of view, 2Kb 1 try to put fairly, appears to 1 tL the City Council ".absolutely : right. It receive# an allocation of, say, filW and finds that owing to its pro a yl4» 6d a day, which would : '2Si lliLge upon it of for every v£ ef alllcfttioa] Jt cannot ueo more than >■ »r 8100, The UQQ unexpended has to «' tto baek by way< of the * labour Department -The workers de- . prived of that are in abject poverty (tad "Wo are "orry ™," say ttAMwpr and council. Wo eauM aot ilfltV®* l have that £4OO. It would xoCftil & departure from our j?rin- : eivlD vtrm'm Wa 6d a day ' and IV n ...inld iiaffeif'fteree. to that. But wo will turn l» tho public and beg of them ia " m \ Anil we will help you I- w. get in our beSK« 'But/' asks.a very bold ai ,7 v " will you give ua ralue* of that returned S2 a week, if it had been 10a a dayf" ? 8 Ve cannot promise that; o• opr best." "hen, cloyed man, "I'm having? Itrgain forced on ' me by > comes .the reply, XP« holding a principle. Yet ideut upholds the council half the allocations should e last farthing. If the on adding 4s tid to the their funds permit, let it >n let it use the rest at explaining why and how d to do ao* If principlo cated by seuii'Starvation it that, the drastie marbegin with the high ciple in tho council. xsut never darkens their led in purple and fine ■ing sumptuously every it ease in Zion. r two points of view ana rhat verdict the general pass on the' business.. I nany will take my view : it is simply impertinent havo rejected thousands allocation money to turn for poor workers who e poorer just because the or them have declined to that was not charity, in re&ee to a political shibjondent asks .me- why I r City Council for critirwer is obvious. I am a ris,tchurch and I recall s of Jerusalem Were kept citizon keeping clean the of his own house. But of the Teturn of allocaBrch was the ilrst, aIK Y to be the worst sinner, titizens bo made to see irdity of the position I it. —YourS, ct J^ TIZENT AND CIRCUSES. DITOB OF TBI! PB«SS. ter day I was a very insr to two gentlemen who present political and a of Italy. One was a lamed. Three or four had gone on holiday to 1 como back an cn " iple of Mussolini. lle id old conditions of tho half a century ago, and n with the better condilussolini. Tho dictator, id brought better Rid editions, and the people n because they fared so jntlenmn had a different e recalled how Mussolini, Socialist leaders, was not lelivering fiery speeches, eople to rise and fr« e m all tyranny, and how d made a complete volte opinions. He climbed 1 usurped all the powers a his bidding, just like : -history. He strangled liberties of the people, f-irlier jcars be dlclarcd md more precious- than «ople," this gentleman s content to accept Mushe feeds them, have sold t"for a mess of pottage, policy of decadent Rome &t|d circuses' —but what Idi have said to it?

Tyranny ia tyranny and ia as bad from' a Mussolini as from a Hapsburg." And" then he recited a long list of the most distinguished of ..Italian intellectuals who had left Italy becauso they could not, would not, live under a tyrannous dictatorship. I was glad to hear the discussion, and my sympathies were wholly with the democrat. Sometimes we hear even among ourselves some whispers that a strong dictator might be our salvation. ■To mo it is quite inconceivable that any person born and bred, in liberty should ever for a moment contemplate the acceptance of any tyranny in any orm m place of our democratic system of government—with all its admitted shortcomings. No man born of woman is fitted to dictate to a nation or a race. A democrat worth his salt would sooner, f ar sooner, give up his life than his liberty of thought and speech and action. I report this discussion vnth the idea that it may make some of us reflect on our happier political position. The dictatorship in Italy is an impious anachronism in civilisation. a T? ens . e * s more deplorable than tho Russian dictatorship, for it has been imposed on a people who are centuries ahead of Russia in intellect and culture. But Italy will yet awake. After Mussolini the deluge, and then Italy will return to tjhe democratic fold, somewhat ashamed of herself, it is to be hoped, it ia a one-man tyranny and will last no longer than the man. Thero was no second Cromwoll, no second Gladstone, no second Rosebery, though all of them had sons.—Yours, etc., JOHN BULL. February 22, 1933. HELP FOR UNEMPLOYED GIRLS. TO THB EDITOR 01T THIt PKB33. Sir, —Why "Simplex" has entered into the correspondence, "Help for Unemployed Girls" is not yet clear. The idea of Miss Robinson putting up a hard fight on behalf of her less able sisters' and shining a light on conditions related to the whole position does not seem to suit "Simplex." The home for the girls (Girls' Co-oper-ative Society being the name suggested) is far from another charitable institution. The public has not been appealed to for, money as "Simplex" suggests. Among various business citizens who count, the matter has been well discussed with the object of doing something in an open and straight manner to alter the conditions of unemployed women. No one has an axe to grind. I must say that much good has been done, but things are still far from what they should be. The sincerity of those interested is proven by the fact that parcels and cash have been delivered at 176 Barbadoes Btroet for the girls to" use at their own discretion. If the amount of money granted by the Government to the Women's Unemployment Committee were made payable in a more direct way to the women themselves, to whom it rightly belongs, it Would surprise the public what tho unemployed women could do to establish an organisation that would be an asset to the country. If "Simplex" has any knowledge of the struggle of the wage-earner to-day he or she will be able to understand why the persons of the highest intelligence, spirit, and courage are waiting dormant in the ranks of the unemployed at the present time. The willingness of "Simplex" to help the girls need not go abegging, but the distinction between beneficiaries and benefactors is out of date. This is not the time for subordination but cooperation. —Yours, etc., AS I THINK. . February 22, 1933. TO Tn» EDITOK OF THE MtBSS. Sir, —With reference to "Simplox's" letter in "Tho Press" to-day, I should like to say a few words from the point of view of a bystander. How can this letter be reconciled with tho fundamental principles of Christianity—even with common humanity? These unemployed girls and women are in this position solely because of economic conditions. Which of us can bo sure of not being the next to join their ranks? Therefore let us' cease to throw our charity (hateful word I) at them. Would any man like to hear his daughters compared with drunken down-and-outs as in "Simplex'a" letter? Where is our Christianity, our humanity? Assistance given to. anyone in need is a social duty, not a charity. The Young Women's Christian Association is definitely a religious institution, and no doubt it does its duty according to its lights. Tliat it fails to appeal to some girls is not surprising. Humble pie has ever been a difficult thing to swallow. Everything is being slowly killed in these unfortunates —pride of appearance, of independence. Must we also deny them such pleasures as come their way? And surely the less morally stable the individual, the greater is her need of assistance. Why bo so down on them when they try to help themselves, in forming 'with public help such a home as the. men have ■formed in Fitzgerald avenue? It is a familiar jibe at unemployedtWomen that they do not try to help themselves. Here is a case where they, are trying, and their efforts are being ruthlessly discouraged. It seems to me a sad thing that we have hot in 1933 got any further than snarling and bickering in newspapers over points that only obscure the real duty before all of to help thoao people less fortunate than ourselves, lest one day we in our turn should ask for help and be denied. Yours, etc., PERSPECTIVE. February 22, 1933. TO THB EMTOB.OF THB FH333. Sir, —"Straightforward" seems to information other than what has been issued through the correspondence columns of "The Press," or else it is "Straightforward's" imagination. To start with, I am not allegedly acting in tho interests of charity.' No one has associated bouts for gold cups with charity. I am nttt aware of the Women s Unemployment Committee entering any bout with me. Tho committee merely wrote stating that provision had already been made for homeless girls at the Young Women's Christian Association. "Straightforward" says there is a lot of work to be done for the unemployed »irls of Christchurch. We know that, but no one has had the courage to set about having this work done. The social workers have done nothing but "butt in," They havo caused more disturbance than necessary. „ If the single unemployed would form an association* as N. P, Taylor suggests, and look after their own interests, there would be no need for a Women's Unnnmlovment -Committee. Simplex aX whether the public will believe the charges I -.have made. I have made no large that I cannot satisfactory nrove There is something undivulged toexplnin the objections to the W omens Unemployment Committee and the Younc Women's Christian Association, but tie reason why an open enquiry should not be to have or W.S Chr »tian Aviation at » women s w" not c i oS ed P-™:: TfiZ for the benefit of "boarduntil 11 ifAv and coin© era."-who can also get a Kej am cum in at any.hour they pl™sc, employed girl «annot do ' al . - name a number

of girls who have been refused or dis-1 missed by the Young Women's Christian Association,- but I am afraid I would not be permitted to publish the reasons of some that I know.—Yours, 6tC '' (MISS) E. V. F. EOBINSON. February 22, 1933. [An officer of the Young Women's Christian Association, to whom this letter was referred, stated that the closing timo for all girls at the hostel, whether they were unemployed or regular boarders, was 11 p.m. To secure keys to the hostel, house-boarders had to apply to the matron, who was responsible for them.] ENGLISH CRICKETERS. TO THE KDITOB OF THE PRESS. * Sir, —In this morning's paper you published a letter signed "Disgusted," criticising the action of the Newcastle cricket authorities in protesting against the inclusion of P. F. Warner in the English team to play at Newcastle. The letter in itself calls ■ for no comment except as it represents a campaign to brand the Australians as "squealers" and so discredit the protest-against the "body-line" bowling. Was "Disgusted" disgusted at the , action of the Atarylcbono Cricket Club managers and captain in refusing to start play in one of the country centres —Bendigo if I am not mistaken—on account of a difference of opinion about the taxation on certain tickets? There was also an incident in Tasmania which would havo been "disgusting" had the Tasnianians been the culprits. Again, it is not usually considered good form to accuse the umpires of unfairness. Now in view of all this camouflage of the real issue, i.e., body-line bowling, I would like to put the case as it appears to me. I confess that I have never seen it, but I base my opinions on newspaper reports. Hobbs' and Warner's opinions are well known. Taking two short extracts from the cabled reports on the tests we have first, "Ponsford was struck nine times," and second the statement that Larwood bowled a particularly "vicious" over, and McCabe did not use his bat during the over, but had to duck his head to avoid being hit. These statements in conjunction with the actual "accidents" should convince any unbiased person as to the quality of the bodyline bowling. No doubt it is legal, but is it cricket? The apologists of the "bumper" bowler take two lines. First—what I have been objecting to in "Disgusted's" and similar effusions; we have the old legal maxim "No case—abuse the other side," played up for all it is worth. Next we have the writers who give us instances of medium and slow bowlers who havo used the "leg-theory" and then go on to give us a list of players who have been injured by Australian fast bowlers of tho past. A quite formidable list of injuries can be collected and it goes to prove not what these writers would have us believe, that this body-line bowling is quite fair and sportsmanliko (I have been trying to avoid that word) but that express bowling is dangerous to a certain degree at all times. .When therefore a fast bowler deliberately bowls a bumping ball at the body or head of an opponent, the action is not merely unsportsmanlike, it is criminal. We havo heard a great deal about the difficulty of framing rules to prevent this dangerous bowling but if the authorities are sincere, the matter is quite simple. In football if a man indulges in rough play he is generally cautioned for a first offence, and ordered off the field for a second offence. So in cricket if in the opinion of the umpire iv man is deliberately bowling, at the batsman's body or head, he should be first cautioned* and if lie persists, he should be at once debarred from bowling again in the match. It is of no uso pretending that such a rule would be contrary to the glorious traditions of cricket. If players and teams deliberately violate tho unwritten laws of the gamo then laws will have to be written to protfent the game from losing altogether its past proud pre-eminence. I hold no brief for the Australians as Australians and had they been the originators of the body-line bowling I should have condemned it just as strongly. For me tho series of test matches has been robbed of all pleasure and I feel sure that there are thousands, perhaps millions, of Englishmen who will feel little pride in tho regaining of the ashes. I am still left wondering who would have won the series of tests but for this now factor. Jardine s remark that Larwood still hits the wicket strikes me as hypocritical. Any cricketer or tennis player knows that concentration is absolutely essential to success. It is difficult under the most favourable conditions to keep an express bowler from hitting your wicket. How much more difficult does it become when in addition to defending your wicket you have to defend your body and head. It is to bo hoped that we shall not have to wait for the death of a prominent cricketer for some action by the authorities, to abolish this dangerous type of bowling. The Australians ire to be congratulated on their refusal to retaliate. The Marylebone Cricket Club now has a glorious opportunity' It will take great moral cour- £? li £ P»t «. fimit that the new nfethod of howling is not cricket, it great enough?— Yours, otc -> TWO-EYED STANCE. February 20, 1933. The settlers of some of the favourite valleys in the Ohura are beginning to realise the value of small P^ dc >cks for Hit keeping down of ragwort and other Seeds. At one time large paddocks were the order Cattle were allowed to wander over the whole section. Consequently the weeds came and multiplied. That is now being changed, and the carrying cnpacity of the country is increasing. Settlers no l°uß €r the land hunger, realising that rt i» better to farm a small plnce well than a large one indifferently. Flving is becoming safer in Great Britain. Nowadays there is only one fatal accident in flying a distance equal to 50 times round the world.