Letters to The Editor

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20906, 13 July 1933, Page 7

Letters to The Editor

Corrtirpondont.s who do uot '• r >inply uilli our rules out in tlio last column of our Leader Pajjo will exm.so us from noticing their loiter.-.

EXTERMINATION OF PESTS. TO IHB EDITOR OF TUB PRESS. Sir,—-In reply to my letter in "The Press" this morning "Kea" shows rather a lack of back country knowledge when he writes about poisoning deer and pigs. The back country men will smile broadly when they read his letter. I put a man on to 4000 acres of rabbit country because ho knew the first and last thing about rabbits. The rabbits cleaned him up; he struck something he had never been up against be/ore. to wit, the rabbits were "poison shy.'' A deer is by nature 50 times more poison-shy than a poison-shy rabbit. A pig is almost immune from poison, or if he gets a taste no more for piggy unless, of course, he is one of the immune. "Kea" is equally wrong when he blames the recent settlers for the ruin of the back country. More than 50 years ago all the best squatters were driven off the land in Southland. Otago, and Marlborough. The spread of rabbits in Canterbury is quite a recent affair and with all the knowledge and experience gained in those provinces from Captain Raymond right down to the present times, the rabbits have beaten the most experienced of our squatters. As to the poor fools who "employ experienced men to go out to destroy the rabbits," I am not going to put anyone away, but "if they only knew"—enough said. Growing boys, as I pointed out in my letter, are the best killers. They, of course, as they get older and more "experienced" will take a pull, but there are always more boys coming on without the fatal knowledge that the rabbit especially must be preserved at all costs.

"Kea" says my scheme will not employ many men. I reiterate that in the transition stage between bare country and millions of pests to grassy hills, from dry plains to well-watered and irrigated country with a dozen pheep fattening to an acre that would otherwise starve a sheep to the acre, the unemployed will automatically and naturally become absorbed. There will be more barrel makers for the tallow, more tin makers for the tongues, more butchers, carpenters, and bakers, more work for the railways and the wharf labourers; in fact there will be more "work and trade for everybody. Let 10,000,000 extra sheep be our target. Every few extra men employed means employment for somebody else, and if Messrs Forbes and Coates get an extra £5,000,000 spread out amongst the people, it will surely attract a fair proportion to Wellington. —Yours, etc., W. It. DEVEREUX. July 12, 1933. I

THE CANTERBURY MUSEUM. TO lIIK EDITOR OF TUB PRB3S. Sir, —It is to be hoped that all citizens who have the interest of the city at heart will take the trouble to sign the petition to his Worship the Mayor asking that the question of the City Council's voting financial assistance to our museum be reopened, with a view to our city benefiting by the Carnegie Trust. A well arranged, properly housed, and up-to-date museum is an immense asset to any city, and it is visited by crowds of people, including a great number of children, to whom it is of immense educational value. The loan exhibition of antique furniture and china, etc,, which I organised last year was visited by more than, 5000 people in a little more than a fortnight, and the interest taken in the exhibits by both old was amazing. Old furniture and china is but one branch of what an up-to-date museum has to show, but nevertheless it is an important and "interesting one, and is made a feature of at the magnificent South Kensington Museum in London. A number of private people would like to leave collections and articles of value to the museum provided that I they thought they would be properly housed. I know of one good instance in particular, a collection of rare old lace, which will go to the new Wellington Gallery unless we are careful. We have already more than the nucleus of a splendid collection in the museum, which in its present state is quite inadequate for the purpose. It would be a great pity to materially alter the existing central hall and the corresponding Rolleston avenue front with its fine fleche, but large, well-lighted and ventilated galleries could easily be reconstructed round this central feature at considerably reduced expense at the present time.— Yours, etc., HEATj G. HELMORE, Architect. July 12, 1933. THE FRUIT EMBARGO. TO rur. EDITOR OK THE PRESH Sir, —ITiere seems to be a nigger in the fruit embargo wood pile. I would like to know the real reason for this agitation. When the interested people in the trade talk of the noor people having to go without citrus fruit as being_ too expensive they arc certainly talking through their hats. Go into any fruit shop and one can get good sweet oranges to-day at from five to eight for a shilling. I have always been a buyer of oranges for my children and 1 can say without fear of contradiction that never have I known this fruit any cheaper.—Yours, etc., ONE OF THE PUBLIC. Methven, July 11, 1933.

LAKE ELLESMERE DRAINAGE. to mi: KLitroK or. tub fhrss Sir, —Meetings are being held, ostensibly to consider a certain scheme for the drainage of Lake Ellesmere, but really, it would seem, to promote wideeyed, unquestioning belief in such scheme. The fact that the country as a whole was to pay made the "carried unanimously" all too easy. It would seem that the Progress League is anxious to be getting something done, but I fear that that body ha:* not displayed a reasonable measure of critical knowledge here, nor any desire to acquire such. Has the Progress League as a whole any considerable knowledge of any scheme for u permanent outlet for Lake Ellesmere other than that submitted by the Public Works Department? The view expressed by the league's representative at the meeting held at Leeston ("The I Press," June 24), that "as laymen they should be prepared to accept the report of highly-qualified engineers" would not. I think, have passed unquestioned had it not been mainly a case of "a gift horse." There might have been reference to such cases as Arapuni and Mangahao, or the hopelessly costly irrigation works in Central Otago. It might even have been suggested that our Public Works engineers should avoid further struggles with the forces of nature until the cloud that hangs over the lower Waimakariri works had lifted. . The Lake Ellesmere Lands Dramnee Board, or at least some connected with that body, appear anxious to be in the present movement, desuite the fact that after the problem had been referred to the Public Works Department this board rushed into an expenditure of (from memory) between £3OOO and £4OOO for excavator plant and induced the Government to find half the money. . A member of the Lake Drainage Board urged (at Leeston) that the ?eport was the result of "careful calculations, not guesswork, and must be taken as correct." The absurdity of

this statement is surely apparent when it is considered that the engineers can tell lis nothing as to the one factor that matters ultimately, viz.,

how many years a mole costing £BB,OOO may be expected to hold up the littoral drift. But when the longer mole was proposed it was estimated (if I remember rightly) that ! shingle would be held up effectively ; for 50-odd years. On this basis I figure that the shorter mole would . serve for roughly 10 years. Thus we have a capital outlay of £BOOO 1.0 £9OOO a year of service. Do they whose "calculations, not guesswork. must be taken as correct" deny that 1 am right, substantially, here? There was reference to a shingle bank occurring between Taumutu and the peninsula. 1 take it that this is a case of the natural take-off of littoral drift where rocky bluffs are met. According to my observations, shingle moving northwards would pass round the peninsula without appearing against the bluffs. Or if shingle did appear in moderate conditions it would probablv disappear under the action of heavy seas. But Taumutu would be quite out of range. However, the proposed mole, with all the calculations and uncertainties attaching to it, including, may I suggest, the uncertainty as to the effect of battery by terrific seas, is, in my opinion, wholly unscientific. Incomparably more scientific schemes have been submitted, and I suggest that the public, who are to pay, are entitled to know at least the outlines of the best of "the many offering" and to be given a reasoned rejection of these before being asked to pay for a scheme concerning which all that can be said with assurance is that it will cost £BB.OOO. There are probably far better schemes that would cost from £30.000 downwards. Why did first the Lake Drainage Board, and afterwards the Public Works Department, refuse to make public any schemes other than those of their own hatching? We are told that the most eminent engineers in New Zealand were consulted. Were these engineers qualified by special experience to advise on propositions such as the above? Was any scheme from outside the department submitted, and, if so, what scheme or schemes, and with what results? As already indicated through your columns I submitted to the Public Woiks Department a scheme for a permanent outlet in which no works extended beyond low tide mark, and which aimed at dispersal, not damming, of the littoral drift. I sought not precipitate adoption, but logical criticism. To obtain this latter is, I find, the more formidable part of the problem. A week ago I submitted to the district engineer, Public Works Department. a proposal to test my plan for dispersal of the littoral drift consistent with initial development of his mole scheme. I endeavoured to show sound reasons for a belief that with a channel of special' design and proportions, and protected on the north side, the mole need not be extended beyond low-tide mark. I endeavoured to make clear also that every feature of my proposed channel (a simple but scientific plan) was at least highly desirable, whether or not the mole was to be extended further seawards. I have not yet received any acknowledgment. Here is an opportunity for the Progress League to render real service. Critical investigation of my claims would, I am convinced, result in our having a permanent outlet that would i be permanent, not temporary, and that ] at a small part only of what the de- ; partment's scheme would cost. the monev saved might be applied to i the advantage of ratepayers other ; than those about the, lake. Does ] the department still seek safety m < silence, and, if so. do the Progress , League and others interested regard , such silence as an attribute of dignity. Is the Public Works Department to a serve, or to be served? ] The Progress League proposes to t make an experiment at enormous cost including that of many miles of light j railway, which would not be neces- ) sarv with my scheme. Success with j a mole can only be temporary. Sue- t cess with my proposed experiment £ would be cheap and permanent. Fail- ( ure in the latter case would not im- i rair the possibilities of the original ( mole scheme. What course does com- j mon sense demand?— Yours, etc., « J. E. HOLLAND. i Avoca Valley. July 1. 1933.

| This letter was submitted to Mi Lanabein. the district engineer of the Public Works Department, who did not wish to comment upon lt.l

' TO IHK EIKTOK OF THE 3 Si r —Will you kindly grant mc space s to reply to Mr McLachlans letter of ' Julv 11 find ask him why clause 107 ' of the Land Act. 1393. should be cast aside as a scrap of paper? I claim that it is just as binding as the scrap of paper over which the war was fought. I could forgive his opposition if it were a wild-cat scheme, or if he were to be taxed to carry it out. There is nothing wrong with the plans, and what is wrong with a subsidy from the , Unemployment Fund, which, as I un- [ derstand it, is a compulsory benefit ■ union of all the workers of New Zea- , land administered by the Government . as the union boss (o find employment for unemployed men. I suppose if Mr : McLachlan wanted any cheap labour ' he would be allotted as much he ' asked without any qualification. He would not be asked to put his cards ! on the table showing his financial position. There is plenty of room all • over New Zealand to use the unemployed relief money on public works only, and the drainage of Lake Ellesmere is urgent and justifiable from any angle at which you look at it. Mr McLachlan, I believe, is a very old settler in Ellesmere, and he ought to know the amount of land that is "involved in the drainage question, but in case he has forgotten I will mention that Mr Hardy Johnson, an engineer, in his report to the Ellesmere and Forsyth Drainage Trust, gave the area of drainage into Lake Ellesmere as 700 square miles. The lake area at flood level was 75,000 acres and the low-water level area was 40,000 acres. Every inch of the 35,000 acres above the low-water level is still liable to flood, so I take it as a very unfriendly act of Mr McLachlan to give poor Ellesmere another kick. In my innocence I thought we had his support, for, as a hard-headed Scot, he ought to know that we cannot produce crops until we get the water away.—Yours, etc.. F. GREAD. Ataahua, July 11, 1933. TO TUB EDITOR OF TUI TJIESS. Sir, —I seem to remember a fable dad used to tell about a dog with a bone in his mouth crossing c • a stream on a plank, and whilst gazing into the clear water he thoughi he saw another dog with a better bone; so he dropped the one he had in order to seize the other, but was disappointed. Well, some of the lake settlers are going to be like that dog. When, if ever, the lake has a permanent outlet and the marginal lands do not receive their submersion from the brackish water, it will be but a short time before the salt is washed down by the rains and the grazing will deteriorate and the land r.»so. Of course, the whole idea at present with many people seems to be to get -cmething for nothing, but the settlers on the marginal lands will discover that they have left the frying pan for the fire, and that their last state will be decidedly worse than their present one.—Yours, etc., AESOP JUNIOR. July 12, 1933. '

- THE TASMAN CHALET. TO THE JIDITOiI OP TUB TRESS. Sir, —As a mountaineer and a not 5 infrequent visitor to the Mount Cook region, I can appreciate the sentiments expressed by those mountaineers and : winter sports enthusiasts who have been raising objections to the changing of the name of the Ball Hut to the t Tasman Chalet. The name of John Bail, as second e president of the Alpine Club, London, •> and also an ardent mountaineer, is 5 worthy of commemoration in our ? mountains. In addition, the Ball Hut 2 has become famous all over the world 7 on account of the number of historic t climbs that have started there. Out £ of respect to those early pioneers, we i of later generations should seriously consider the matter before we change r the names given to places by them and which have become familiar to us through old associations. , Nevertheless, it would be absolutely incorrect and quite misleading to call r , the building that has just been comj pleted a "hut." This new building is 3 a two-storev structure with sleeping i . accommodation for 100 people. It has a kitchen and a dining room to cater j for a like number, and a lounge room I overlooking the Ball and Tasman Gla- ; ciers. During the season a special [ staff is employed to cater for the wants J 1 of the visitors. i It can be seen that this new build--1 ing, which has cost a considerable sum of money to erect, has greatly outl grown its title of "hut" and now cor- - responds in size and facilities more to ■ a "chalet." : This is the point—we mountain ' lovers want the name "Ball" kept as ■ a memorial to John Ball: yet thebuild- ! ing has been transformed to a "chalet." ' Why not. then, put the two names together and christen it the "Ball Chalet." ' —Yours, etc., : MOUNTAINEER. ' Timaru, June 12, 1933. THE NEW ZEALAND LEGION. TO THK EDITOR OF THE MESH Sir, —"Machiavelli." in his letter today, resorts to a stereotyped futility in saying I begged the question, just because my reply was not what he wanted it to be. I replied as a member of the legion, not as one who would, like my critic, find fault with it for no discernible intelligent reason. Let me restate the case briefly. We are all agreed, even my critic, that our national affairs are in a deplorable.' mess. Some of the causes of that: mess are international, and must be dealt with internationally. Our representatives, to bear their share in the international settlement, must be the best brains we can find. Do we find them in our present Parliament? The legion is out to find them, and it can find them. It will not be a hard task. There are other causes that are •ational. These New Zealand can tackle successfully. There has been a protracted orgy of national extravagance. It must be cut out. There has been gross maladministration of the national business because it was being conducted under a party system that is quite indefensible, measures being proposed, carried, and opposed not at all on their merits or in the public interest, but simply because the party system found it well to act in whatever way it did, guided only by its own ambition for office or the interests of the sections it represented. The legion aims at a government that will fairly represent all sections, and not one or a few of them. "Machiavelli" seems obsessed by the word diagnosis as if our Parliament were a body of expert diagnosticians. Our Parliament is just a body of commonplace men of every commonplace ability, who can boast of nothing higher than the political jugglery bred under the party system. They have aggravated our distresses, and the legion asks the people to reconstitute cur Parliament as a business body determined to transact the business of the country on business lines, unvitiated by the prejudices, the personal ambitions, and the class interests which under the party system have made it the scorn of all honest men. I am. not hopeful that this will satisfv "Machiavelli." He will probably bombard me with further obiter dicta about diagnosis, but I am quite content to leave the matter with the people, and leave my critic in the mists of his own imagining. From even this brief letter the common-sense man will understand the aims and ideals of the legion, and I am content with that, even if "Machiavelli" is "left lamenting."—Yours, etc., B LEGIONARY. c July 12, 1933. t

THE SCHOOL JOURNAL POEM. TO THE EDITOR 0* TIIS I-P.E33. Sir,—lf you let this discussion start it will be the most important one you have had for some time, and this page, I aiid not the schools, is the fitting arena I for it. My admiration for school ' teachers is such that I think they will always impart sufficient loyalty and not of the too truculent variety. I would like to see the profession given more latitude as to the teaching of origins, so that children will not have to unlearn a lot of error that is mistakenly taught in other directions. This little one may start others to give us their opinions who are better qualified than I am.—Yours, etc., PETER TROLOVE. July 12, 1933. TAIL-W AGGERS' CLUB. TO HIE EDITOR OT THE TRBSS. Sir,—At the annual meeting of the Tail-Waggers' Club held in Wellington last week, a vote of thanks to the press of New Zealand was passed, and the name of your valued paper was especially mentioned. I am directed to convey to you the thanks of the executive for the support that you have given to the club during the last year, and .to express the hope, not only that you will continue the assistance you have so freely given, but that the club will merit your interest. With many thanks.—Yours, etc., D. HARE, Secretary. Wellington, July 11, 1933.