Letters to The Editor

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20987, 16 October 1933, Page 7

Letters to The Editor

I,wespondcnts ivbo do not comply -with rules set o"' >" tlle I;lst column ol ouf 'eider Pa S° v ' iU excU6e u3 from noticing , J hoV !««•«• i pgjIOCBACV AND THE FUTURE TO THE EDITOR Or THB TRESS. gir ( —l read your thoughtful apd ,; .tfgjstive leader, entitled as above, in sft C pjress" to-day with very great nterest. t realise the difficulty of jiving clear and full expression to , ne - s thoughts upon such a great sub,c{ within tho limits of such an article, a« d that difficulty hampers equally any effective criticism of it. : A( o t that my criticism is hostile. It lis probable that a fuller discussion v'ould find us in substantial agreement but, accepting the position with "it it's limitations. I would offer here a few critical comments from one who co°S not wholly agree with what appears to be the conclusions and implications of your article. I agree wholly with you that Fascism and National Socialism—did you mean sovietism by the latter term, and if so why did you not say so plainly? —arc- passing phases, cxtraordinary and fleeting episodes in r-olitical history. Most, heartily do I IS approve of your implication that these 1 I svstems must fail and fall because I 1 they are opposed to the free spirit |1 of man. I am rather perplexed, howII ever, when further along you appear If to pour contempt on the only political IS form we have yet discovered to give || reasonable expression to that free II spirit. You say. ". . . . A system of 111 democratic institutions which finds IS its wisdom by counting heads is not II adequate." If that is not a jeer at 11 popular and universal suffrage, what II J3 it? And it it is, why did you not I say so in explicit terms, so that we II might know just where you stood? If || you do think our present democratic !|i system of popular election inadequate 1 or inequitable, why did you not sug--1 gest a better way as an alternative? I I confess that I am so stupid that I I have not been able to think of a bet--1 ter system, though I think there might 1 hi alterations here and there to imi prove it. I think you have set your- | self to hoe a very hard row, if you II have begun to teach the public that I they must forego "counting heads" or I votes to determine the choice of their J representatives and rulers. The genI tral opinion will be that so aptly and I forcefully expressed by Mr Downle I Stewart, that "self-government is betI ter (or more acceptable) than good 1 government," and you cannot, as I see I it, have self-government without 1 counting heads. I Instead of visualising some heavenly I political system and rapily losing the I present in an impossible future, would I it not be far more sensible and praeI tical to take our system as we have J it and proceed to an overhaul of it. I dealing immediately with its most 1 obvious and glaring defects, and pro--1 ceeding steadily 'to bring it up to suit I the demands and exigencies of the I time, without disturbing the principle I of "counting heads," a principle I liberty loving people will not suffer to I be impugned, much less destroyed. I There is no hint of that in your I lender, which might, I think, be con- j I slrued by supporters of the soviet as 1 a vague or veiled support for that I system of tyranny. The only organI. ised attempt that is being "made to I, take our political system and clear it I " from vices that render it ineffective I and perhaps corrupt is that of the I New Zealand Legion, which for some I reason or other has failed to secure I ihe clear endorsement of "The Press '" 1 Yet. "The Press" will not, I think 1 deny that the vices which the legion I would remove from our svstern of I government should be removed to the I great advantage of the svst»m and tho SI • commonweal. Would it" not bo more ■ sensible if instead of dreaming of a 111 ihadowy future political paradise. a|| political reformers of to-dav should If tB Ke first things first, remove the HI evils that arc universally admitted. M and begin with tho- abolition of the ■ P artv system, which is neither demoII cratic nor equitable, making the '■ ambitions of parties and politicians ■ predominate our public interests and 1 tne very idea of reasoned, dispassion- ■ ate judgment on national issues in 1 Parliament a mockery and delusion? I Such a course indicates the legion's I first lino of action. The people arc I supporting the lesion—as I am—but I who will explain whv many ardent 1 reformers in press and public life arc standing aloof from it? Can it be that j mey are too infected by the virus of I Party, which has brought about tho ! very negation of democracy in outdemocratic system—for party govern- ■ Kent means that one party represontI hir one section of tho people will rule I ana dominate the whole? How can 1 1 P crv 'ersion of tho democratic I weal be supported by any democrat? I -Yours, etc., I n . u DEMOCRAT. 8 October 13, 1933. I ißy National Socialism we meant I the Nazi movement. 'The name I Nazi is an abbreviation of National Socialist. The point about "countII ing heads"' will probably be dearer to our correspondent if he reads again the last few sentences of the leading ■ article he quotes. His other points arc dealt with in a leading article printed this morning.—Ed., -The Press."! THE MALLARD TO THE EDITOR OF TK3 ITiKS.S. Sir,—ln his letter on the Mallard, "■ r J. B. Starky expresses doubt and surprise concerning some of the stateI "tents-. I made in your paper. "I am II surprised, also," he says, "at Mr I Read's statement that Mallards have Wen in the Dominion for more than /() years. This surely would take some Wication." The matter is one of and if Mr Starky turns up * M. Thomson's Naturalisation of lants and Animals in New Zealand a ** Will find all tho necessary corro--1 Ration of my statement. Seeing I '«t he is under the impression that J and Major Whitney were the only 1 W« reeders °f Mallards during the I SS. 25 years - he wiU probably be furil t L„f, surprised to learn that some I of Mallards were turned n Awv ur . m S that period by various I ¥jmatlsatlon Societies. It W 3 ? 1 ? 112 the data f f nesting of the "1 thZi 1 m Canterbury, I had, two or 1 Ct? S Sb T b f fore writing to you, been 1 toth i , Lako Ellesmere, and I saw I tha" t t C and dl ' ake of four P airs 1 ths Ti«i new to bo Soing to nest near I 'he nit * Rivtil ' road - As these wore 1 P«vinT, y -. four V airs l had seen there i 'ft'S' y ' l ,ld as il was in the early I Ci2r? when T F;) w the birds, it is I if y cortai " that none of the I mv i as sltti "S. a-" thf>.v do not nor--1 '^v/hon^' 0 lhe ncat around midill *I!T <£, n On the lake it--1 Na*^T^ ral othcr pairs - and "° I Mr Starky's birds. 1 evidently II ° 3 Lake■ p« r nestin S date ' from those II E?%sor e T ? e ? a . of flight, I quoted ; II S in?l9?s L f ds Corougli Thomson, , If JfiSf U P all the most ; 111 H -hET-T 0 ! 01 Gei and Bag- ■ 111 : «* ttori c ?S s ** er « l M« enlightenment . 11 l JW , *Ri ll * P, as «ges to which I , 11 v »y'hioK W!U , find the oW ideas II Oration SPGeds of fli S ht duri "g ■ II y WcS?■ iJ -f e not EU PPorted by j II th! Vldence - His testimony 11 h 3 4k 5c liabilities of the Mai- ; II t b Cck.- 1 , mnthn ' lnny rcason - ' IS S. Sm£s as " damilin S with , 11 uq " - *'* tar as the bird* ;\

qualifications go as a feral sporting bird in New Zealand. He says, "Mv experience with the duck is that she 5 ™ * xce J lei :* 3itter and good mother if confined after hatching. If allowed to run loose she will forage a lot and generally manages to lose a large 'perh,hi? Se + ? f . the T atch " lt is A this habit that makes the bird useless here. Indeed, this is probably the reason why, with all the help it has received from some societies, and all the money that has been spent on it. M A he , '? port that its sponsors claimed that it would do. Mr Starky accuses me of showing a lack of courtesy to your correspondent, "R.E., Christchurch." Why'' Because I said that "R.E., Christcnurch, either did not want to see hybrids, or did not know what he was looking for? If "R.E., Christchurch," will sign his name to his next letter una tell ttu- public the circumstances in which he made his "investigation " I am quite willing to leave it to thr> public to judge whether either, neither or both of these alternatives utted.—Your;?, etc., rv, • ,„ ,„ E °GAR F. STEAD. Octooer 14, 1933.

-NAVAL DISARMAMENT TO TBB EDIIOK OV TUTS paiss. Sir, —On reading your paper on Thursday morning I was interested to find an editorial condemning the "astonishing frankness and bad taste" of Rear-Admiral Burges Watson's address to the Invercargill Rotary Club on this matter. To be absolutely consistent, the advocates in our midst of disarmament should al:j advise the return of her colonies to Germany, on the ground that our action in retaining them is offensive and provocative to Germany. The trouble is that if we disarm further (not that there seems to be much chance of that now), and do not hand Germany's colonies over sooner or later Germany will attempt' m no uncertain manner, to get them back. If wc are to keep these colonies, we must be armed to resist attacks on them. It is well known that our cruiser strength is not sufficient, in the event of war, to protect our trade routes. In this case, the navy is used as an instrument of defence, not agtression. You refer to the German submarine campaign of 1917 and to the "tip-and-run raids of German ships on east coast towns as an instance of a strong navy being aggressive. It was because the German navy was so weak that Germany resorted to those methods; because the Gei-man commanders knew that they could always scuttle back inside their mine-fields, that they raided Scarborough, Whitby and Hartlepool, knowing that it would be a considerable time before our big ships could come down from thennorthern base. It was after Jutland, when the German fleet escaped in the darkness, never again to venture out except to ignominious surrender, that the German submarine campaign reached the climax of its activity. Perhaps, had the admiral stated that the British navy had never been used for purposes of aggression, but for. defence, and the "sun shield" of our Empire, then your editorial might not have been written. As it is, I should be pleased to know in what manner Rear-Admiral Burges Watson's speech offends against the canons of good taste. Granted that he was astonishingly frank; but nearly every British naval officer holds exactly the same opinion in this matter. May I refer you to those words of Earl Jellicoe, rurely the greatest naval authority of our time. "The-?ea is our life. By the use of it our Empire was formed. If wc fail to appreciate its value, the Empire will perish.—Yours, etc., F. October 15, 1933. I UNEMPLOYED IN ENGLAND TO THB LIUTO-t OY TUB r!'.E33. Sir, —"E.P.C.'s" criticism of my reported interview in your columns of a week ago would suggest a wholesale condemnation of the living conditions in his native town of Newcastle. It is so easy to read more into a remark than it merits that I feci justified in slating that the text of my interview was concerned mainly with tho city of Sheffield, where 1 spent some weeks amongst the unemployed expressly to study conditions. As a general rider, | I added that unemployment was bad in other cities, especially the large shipbuilding centres, Newcastle among them. 1 am not unaware that great efforts have been made to effect slum clearance and rehousing throughout England. On the contrary I mentioned the great clearing-up that has been effected in the Poplar district in London. Nor do I doubt that £2,500,000 has been spent in New-castle-on-Tyne on slum improvement, it needed it.

On the other hand, I still maintain that conditions in the poor and unemployed quarter.-:; of many of the big industrial cities are appalling. If the evidence of my own senses were not enough, the opinions of H. V. Morton, ■whom I think it will be admitted is one of the irost respected social critics in England, would remove all doubt. In a .series of articles in the "Daily Express" he condemned in the very strongest terms the living conditions in large areas of Jive of the northern cities. Sheffield and Leeds were among them, but I am not sure whether Newcastle was included in the number. Further, only a short time before I left England, the Archbishop of York made a nation-wide appeal per medium of the screen, for assistance in a slum-clearance campaign. His remarks were supported by a number of views of living conditions in slum areas. They were unbelievably bad. I would point out to your correspondent that, my remarks were on the subject of unemployment and housing in poor quarters, and not in painting a picture of an English city. No one imagines that any city is all slum, nor do I suggest that Newcastle-on-Tyne is all ugliness. I shall be reassured, however, to hear from your correspondent that Tyneside can present a clean sheet in the matter of housing, sanitation, and satisfactoryliving conditions amongst her large army of unemployed. As far as I am concerned, this closes correspondence on the subject.— Yours, etc.. GEOKGE T. WILSON. Greymouth, October 13, 1933. POLITICAL OBITEK DICTA ■lO THE EDITOR Of TirE rp.ESS. Sir, —lii a further reply to "S.M." I s'.v.uld like to say that he errs when stating that mine is a policy of defeatism—far from it. < Also, if his idea of "working in the best way possible" for the removal of evils is by unlimited eruptions in the press, then I think: he is indeed engaged on a forlorn hope, and every penny stamp used goes to, swell the coffers from which so much has been scandalously wasted in the last few years, on such schemes as the Auckland railway station, and the extension of railways ia the north of our island. He writes as ?f the evilin our midst is a hidden secret, "Some will hear me and tell others" is his cr>. heavens alive! Why everyone does liea\en.h, d "* u .. J „ ve no others to

disappoint me. : nd the "policy of defeatism" seems to be the watchword of the very crowd that ho is "not surprised or disappointed with." So I why pick on me, the only voice which has answered tium the apparently empty void of public interest in the [matter. I have enquired (and who does not these days* among the people of my acquaintance and I have found, as he suggests, how emphatic and unanimous is the feeling against the waste of time, wash; of money, waste of everything that is going on; and neither one man ov even two can do a single thing to alter it until election time. I think "S.M.'s" last few lines he hits the nail right on the head, with the words, "I know that the people are steeped in somnolence or apathy or hopelessness.' Too true, and I am glad he nas found it out by himself. This is why we vote as we do, and get what wc get, and while the vast majority of our vo'.'. rs continue to push into power men who, to use "S.M.'s" own words, are careerists and opportunists, New Zealand will never recover. There are too many brainless people in New Zealand who are allowed or forced to vote, so it is no wonder we are in a mess. It is by the free will of the people of New Zealand, by virtue of the ballot-box. I that we are governed as we arc. and there is no redress. Maybe "S.M.'s" [slashing comments past; and to come j will have their effect at our next elec- ; lion. I earnestly hope so. The day may come again when we shall see installed a body of citizens, whose sole aim is to serve their country, and not to sit in the seat, of dictatorship. My claim, which "S.M." speaks about, is not monstrous, neither is it impertinent. It is simoly fact.—Yours, etc.. SILVER LINING. October 14, 1933.

TO Till-'. KOITDII OF THE rilKiS. Sir, —I cannot repress the trite observation that this business of life is a cruel and callous thing. A week ago the leader of the Labour party was stricken down in the midst of his work, but his work goes forward without him, and already the process of forgetting him has begun. Perhaps it is well it should be so. for life might otherwise be impossible, but the thought should give pause to the most cocksure of us all, even politicians "crawing crouse on their ain midden keids." There is not one of us indispensable. The world will get along without the very best and wisest of us, though that may appear to be rank heresy to very many valuable politicians—we have local specimens who take themselves so seriously that it might be thought they imagine everything would come to a dead stop if they intermitted their labours —and stopped talking. I, who have always been an opponent pf the late Mr Holland's politics, would here raise my lance as my pen in a last sincere salute. Peace to his ashes! He was a good man—and what better epitaph could any man desire? In the House the business of tire Dominion is being carried on in tho same "thowless" perfunctory manner. We have learned to expect no better. It must often strike anyone who contemplates our national assembly that no other business in the world could be successfully conducted as our national business is. And, of course, our national business is not successfully or even intelligently conducted. We are all agreed upon that, excepting always the self-satisfied politicians themselves—and though we fatuously tolI erate them, we do not really take them seriously cr believe in them. Our own Mr Howard, who. as the stern economist truculently denouncling the extravagance of the Coalition, always makes me recall Carlyle's "seagreen incorruptible" has strangely and i significantly changed his tune. Instead of condemning the extravagance of our bloated delegation to the futile Economic Conference, he appeared last week as apologist for it. Readers may read in "The Press" of Saturday, a summary of his speech. He defended the delegation and the presence in London of the Prime Minister. Well, well! Whv this volte face? Cynicism again supplies the answer. The Labour party thinks it is within cooee of office and its rich prizes and perquisites. Labour members must therefore tread warily, and not denounce extravagances which they will continue and most probably enlarge if and when they secure office. Extravagant as past and present Governments' have been they are but poor, parsimonious spenders compared with Labour in office—Yours, etc., S.M. TtWV,

TIIL AVON WILLOWS to riif. kdito:'. oi' itn: hie-;.?. Sir. —Since my first letter about the "passing of the willows" I read your article "Trees on Avon Banks." It is quite inaccurate. Can the Superintendent of Parks say why all the willows 'except one) were removed between the Antigua street bridge and the Montreal street bridge on the Oxford terrace side. These willows were particularly beautiful and 1 maintain were neither diseased nor rotten, because after they had been uprooted, I inspected the wood and found it quite sound. So far no attempt lias been made to plant voung willows- to replace them. The whole appearance of this part of the Avon has been spoilt and it will be many years, if ever, before it regains it's beauty. This wanton destruction of the willows should wake mi our citizens and make them protect the beauty spots of our city.—Yours, etc.. CAMBRIDGE TERRACE W. October 13, 1033.

TO 'I OK EDITOR c-r 1M FMSS. Sir,—l have just read the letter in your issue of this morning signed "Anti Vandalism" for is it "anti-vivi-section"?), together with the observations of Mr Barnctt, to whom vou had referred the letter. _ I think that Mr Barnctfs observations show a much stronger case than do those of your correspondent. In the letter two questions' arc asked, both of which Mr Barnctt answers. But what in the wide world is the good of a paltry question or two from citizens who cannot look a few years ahead.' As Mr Barnett says, neither he nor any others in authority take any pleasure in felling and cutting back the old willows, but if the river banks are to be kept safe and in continuous good order, cutting back must be resorted to. Many of your correspondents appear to think that those who agree that it is wiser to keep the willows in check dislike them. But this is not so; the willows arc beautiful, and I am sure everybody thinks so. Though thev are beautiful, nevertheless, many o"f the other trees that clothe the river banks are even more beautiful. In yesterday's issue a correspondent said that he could not bear to stav upon the Gloucester street bridge and look up the river where the willows used to be. and that that view was the "worst" view of all. , Well, I stood upon that bridge to-day, and could scarcely bear to come away, so beautiful was it. The wonderful nor'west light was playing upon all tho sycamores up stream, and upon the perfect lime below the bridge. If your yesterday's correspondent really thinks that these trees would be better replaced by more of the willows, he must indeed be cock-eyed. This, as you must be well aware, :s a city of differences of opinion, and people find it very difficult to agree among themselves. The reason probably is that we arc not high enough above ncii level, and so are very often in a fog. But I think that public servants should be first well chosen and ♦ hen well supported. They are more likely to be right than are the citizens, who only give the various matters spasmodic consideration. However, nearby hill dwellers appear to have just as much trouble as do dwellers of the plains. Quite recently at Cashmere there were two great fights, first about a stone wall that was in the end razed to the ground and immediately all built up again, practically in the same position. Quite soon there was the famous "beautifying" of the reserve, alongside these hill dwellers, on the banks of the Hcathcole, which finished in sonvi irate taxpayer actually sawing down the much-discussed single specimen monkcv-puzzle in the middle of the night. " He certainly won that argument: but I have not heard of any of us general tree lovers treating a sinrle one of the tremendous willow battalion so drastically as that.YourS ' CtC " PISCATOR. _October H. .1933. TO Taj EDIIO3, OF MS ?F.6ii Sir,—The official interview and report on the disappearance of the Avon willows, published in your issue of October 10, is interesting, if not altogether satisfactory. In regard to misleading outsiders about the removal of the willows, the empty spaces are so glaringly apparent that only those who "have eyes; and see not" could possibly overlook ihe disaster. To imply that your correspondents' criticism gave a wrong impression is unjust and contrary to tacts. With reference to replanting, may I draw attention 4o

a few positions in the town area evidently overlooked: (1) Antigua street bridge (Oxford terrace; to Montreal street. There are now only two willows remaining—several slumps on view—no replanting of willows. (2i Opposite Clarendon Hotel—many willows removed. '•!' On bank below Supreme Court buildings—general clearance of willows. Mr Owen dilates on opening up tho 1 iow from the Supremo Court side. 7s that necessary? The majority of people view these buildings from rhc opposite side of the river and know what an enchanting foreground the willows made lor these line old buildings. Flower beds, with their varying colours, make delightful breaks c-n the long green lawns, but the charm and character of the river is entirely lacking without the beauty of the sweeping, swaying willows. Trusting the assurance of replanting willows will be adhered to, and thanking Mr Barnctt for his information concerning the subject, also "Tne Press" for investigating the matter.—Yours, etc., WILLOW LOVER. October 13, 1933. 1 POLICY OF THIS LEGION '!'<.> Tin; editor cr Tin: nsuHs. Sir,—While I am not, optimistic about the prospect of drawing the New Zealand Legion into a discussion, at least an intelligent one, about the fundamentals of political philosophy and its own weird theories, the letter signed by "Legionary" in Wednesday's issue tempts me once again to challenge its sophistries and expose its reactionary role. It aims at an "ordered, prudent system of efficient government," and almost every legion circular sings the praises of Switzerland's federal system, elective cabinets, and whatnots as ways to that end. Are they? Switzerland has pressing economic problems and quite lately had fierce riots in which the soldiery took part. Not content with one Fascist party, like most capitalist countries, it has two, both of which curse Swizerland's maudlin democracy by bell, book, and candle. Switzerland may be termed the world's hotel, and many of the guests are slipping out of the vestibule while the clerk is not looking. The League of Nations, its principal industry, is bankrupt because only a few of the members are paying their "subs." The legion has no real policy yet. It is waiting on Hitler. It wants to see how Fascism is going to fare with the further deepening of the crisis. Hitler's programme is a return to the beginnings of capitalism, with everybody owning a little bit of property. It sounds like the Great Divide, with which early opponents of socialism derided it. Germany's Chancellor seeks mass support for such -a policy from the mass which has an irreconcilable hatred of capitalism. How long can he and his party delude the mass? Not long now. Almost every circular of the legion is wistful about the outcome of such mad adventures. I soy "mad" advisedly, as foreign alienists have gone to the trouble of investigating the pathological history of the leading Nazis.

The legion is just another set of dreamers, albeit a very dangerous, one, theorising about how to untie the knot into which the social "system" has tied itself. It will not favour revolution. It will never decide that the knot whicn cannot be untied must be slashed away. "Long views," it favours, as though any pillar of our wonderful social "system" can take a long view to-day. How much does an ordered, prudent system of government matter, or is such possible, if the building is done on rotting, crumbling foundations? The legion shouts for state budgetary equilibrium. Is that the solution, while private budgetary disequilibrium is everywhere in evidence. No country has proved it, not even New Zealand. For that very reason the dream of the communists will not "recede further than ever," and they laugh in their sleeves at all the attempts to dissolve the indissoluble knot. They are one with the legion when it decides parliamentary democracy, but enjoy the spectacle of the legion showing New Zaaland how to solve the Contradiction of how to do the work of a party while not becoming a parry i'self. The ltgio" will probably not discuss the theory of communism (vide "Legionary";, but it spends much time in discussing the communists and their progress towards winning a mass oasis. Meanwhile many rank and file legionaries arc pursuing their studies quite independently of Ihe dicta issued from legion headquarters. May their lab-

ours result in a conviction that the problem cannot be settled within the constitutional boundaries set by their leaders.—Yours, etc., MARXIST. October 13. 1933. DOUGLAS SOCIAL CREDIT ■io Tin; kditor or Tin-: i'Bi-.ss. Sir.--The Prime Minister stated in tho Mouse of Representatives that delegates to tho Economic Conl'crcnco had been surp ised to hear that the Douglas social credit scheme was stiil alive in New Zealand. Well, at least, Mr Forbes will know, by now, that it is well alive—and kicking. However, before he left for the conference he admitted that he knew nothing about currency or finance, and it is pretty obvious now that his remarks in the House, particularly on the Central Bank, have been put in his mouth by his financier friends on the other side. It is evident, too, that he is ill-informed on the trend of thought iii the world of men by his belief that schemes for currency reform are not receiving any consideration from serious-minded people. It will, probably be news for those who think that, currency reform is dead to know that on July 18 last "a vast meeting was held in Queen's Hall, London, to protest against the loss of the people's right to control the nation's money, and it is said to have been one of the most remarkable meetings ever held in London. Row:; on rows of professors and members of the Royal Society, with 75 British members of Parliament were present, and it was carried on the motion of the Marquis of Tavistock, eldest son of the Duke of Bedford, and president of the Social Credit Association of Great Britain, that the prerogative of the Crown and people over all forms of money should be restored. Mr F. L. Rushbrook, liaison officer with the Indian princes, after a motion against any return to the gold standard had been carried, spoke to a motion calling on the Government to remove quickly the fear of want from the people and 'the fear to act from our legislators' and that the Cabinet should alter the financial system." It is important to note also the trend of thought among the churches of all denominations. The Dean of Canterbury, Dr. Hewlett Johnson, writing in the "Birmingham Mail" of February 16, 1933, said: "Twelve years ago I sat in Major Douglas's chambers and followed his convincing reasoning. Every prophecy of his has come uncannily true. I heard economists and bankers confute him. but facts belied them, and again and again they shift their ground and contradict one another." The present Pope's statement in his encyclical letter called Quadragesimo Anno is also significant. "It is obvious in our days that wealth and immense power have become concentrated in the hands of a few men. These few exercise in the economic sphere a domination that is despotic. This power becomes particularly irresistible when exercised by those who, because they hold and control money, are able also to govern credit and decide to whom it shall be allotted. In that they supply the life blood, so to speak, of the whole economic body. They have their grasp on the very soul of production, so that no one" dare breathe against their will. Immense power and despotic economic domination are concentrated in the hands of a few. This anomaly of super-government by a few world financiers must be corrected by securing the control of credit in the hands of" responsible public authority." The Rev. Robert Scrutton, writing from Coventry. England., says, "To date. 305 religious bodies of almost all denominations. Christian leaders and the social credit groups throughout the country are ready to challenge the present system and demand the establishment of a Christian order of society, based on the Douglas proposals. When the campaign gets into full swing, we have no doubt that numbers of the bishops who are at the moment sitting on the fence, will join in and encourage others to do the same." It is far from fact to say that no professional economist advocates the Douglas proposals. Professor Irvine, one tim® Professor of Economics at Sydney University, has openly declared his belief that the Douglas proposals are the only hope for the world, and in his recent book, Tho Midas Delusion, he wrote: "The policy of deflation., that is. of reducing price levels and costs lo those of 1913, was deliberately x'ifeineer.ed. and carried

into practice wth a ruthlessness typical of actual warfare. Its ostensible objectives were to raise the international value of sterling and reduce standards and costs so as to enable the countries concerned .to compete more successfully in the world's markets. It was that plan that dislocated industry in Europe and America, It was that which cut our wool and wheat prices in half." The report on the Douglas.proposals in the "Western Australian Parliament is alro worthy of note. During his speech, the Premier 'Mr C6llier) made these remarks: "There can be no doubt that the present economic system is decadent and out-of-date. (Hear, hear, from both sides of the House.) A change must take place, and, if the people who are in positions that make laws do not realise that a complete change is necessary, they will find themselves and their people left far behind. The people of the world will not continue to live under the conditions that have obtained in recent years." Th.e ill-informed statements of some members of the present Government remind one of the utterance of that real statesman, Disraeli: "It is easier to criticise than be correct."—Yours, etc., ATOLA. Ashburton, October 13, 1933. INSCRIPTIONS ON POSTAL BOXES TO IHE EDITOR CUT THE I'RE33. Sir, —I do not know if the residents of your city understand the inscriptions on the postal boxes, but as a visitor reading "10 p.m." on one on the corner of Bealey avenue and Durham' street, I imagined that letters posted before 10 o'clock on Saturday evenings would be forwarded on to the south by the Sunday night train. I now find that the box is not cleared on Saturday evenings, and I really think there should be a notice on the box to that effect. —Yours, etc., VISITOR. October 12, 1933. [The acting-chief postmaster (Mr J. G. Young) said that before 1930 Sunday clearance times were not shown on boxes, because there were very few Sunday mail trains. Boxes now being put up showed Sunday times, and a man was at present inspecting all boxes in the city to see that they were brought up to date. There were a good many hundred boxes in the city, and the task of checking all of them was not a small one. An inspection was 'made yesterday of the box at the corner of Durham street and Bealey avenue, which was found to be incorrect. Steps would be taken at once to put it right, and this would be done at all other boxes.] TRELS BY THE ROADSIDE To Illf. UDITOf. OF .THE iT.ESS. Sir,—Mr George Gould's criticism of the m-oposed planting of trees by the roadside throughout Canterbury no doubt came as a shock to the enthusiastic citizens who have entered upon a campaign to plant trees by the roadside throughout the country, but they will find that Mr Gould is not far out in his estimate of the measure of support likely to come from the local bodies. Even m Christchurch roadside planting is not always welcome, and I can quite understand the objection which is sure to bo raised in country districts to the overshading of roadways in winter time, where horse traffic has to be uped. That there is room tor tree planting theie can be no doubt: it would add much to the beauty of many parts, but 1 would strongly advise approaching ihe local bodies first. Get the local authority interested, and it will be found that there are throughout Canterbury roadside wastes which could, be "used with very great success.

Take the old coach road to Tai Tapu, for example. There are several stretches of river bank where the trees could be planted far enough removed from the roadside to disarm any objection that might be raised. One stretch is near the old Lansdowne Homestead; another one lies nearer Tai Tapu, and there are many roads where planting could be done on lhe south side, leaving the road exposed to the warm sunshine. In such situations, planting would not j only bcau*:i'v the road but serve as! a shelter. . I I would suggest lo ihe committee not, to confine its work ta .roadside

Planting, but to try to induce land owners to do more planting. Trees are beautiful anywhere. In this connexion the committee could with profit visit Mr R. M. D. Morten's estate, where.it will see evidence of well thought out planting. I venture to say 'that a. few years hence the trees which lie has planted.in View' of the main road will be a picture to look uponv.adding, beauty to the wayside. —Yours, etc., H. G. ELU October 1?, 1333. BIG FIELDS FOR TROTTING RACES TO THE KDITOtt 0? THE PM5f. - , Sir, —I was present at both • the Methven and New Brighton trotting meetings and could not help noticing the particularly unwieldy fields of horses on the limit of the slow class mile and a half races. It must be quite obvious to these clubs that they are losing considerable revenue, as a great many racegoers are reluctant to bet when there are a large number of horses on the same mark. I believe that this unhappy state of affairs is caused by the lack of races of classes between the 3min 40sec mark and3min 43sec mark. With the number of horses now on lines 6, 7, and 8, classes for 3min 42sec horses would give patrons much better entertainment. To-day an owner of a horse on a 3min 41sec or 3min 42sec mark usually forfeits one or two seconds and enters his horse in a 3min 40sec race, again increasing the number of horses on the limit of that particular rate.—; Yours, etc., ■- RAMON. October 12. 1533. MISSPELLED WORDS TO THE EDITOR OF THE PRESS. Sir,—lii to-day's paper is a letter concerning really not a correctness of spelling but rather the use of the correct word, or form of the word. The question is whether "advisability" or "advisableness" is correct. Both my Webster and oxford dictionaries give both words, with preference for "advisabilitv." From a point of sound, advisability is certainly preferable.— Yours, etc., L.J.T. October 13, 1933. TO Till; EDITOR OF THE MESS. Sir,—ln answer to Henry Buttle 5& the correspondence columns of "The Press" relating to the word "advisability." The dictionary of Chas. Annandale gives the following: "Advisability (ad-viz-a-bil-i-ti), advisableness, expediency." Advisability is the correct way the word is spelt.—Yours, etc.. MRS L. MAHONEY. October 13. 1933. WHERE TO LIVE IN CHRISTCHURCH TO 'j'liX EWTOa OS 1 THE VS.Z.ZZSir,—lt is a pity someone did not solve the difficulties of your correspondent, "J.R.," by telling him of Sumner. The most popular of all New Zealand's watering places, it holds its features up to one of the sunniest and bluest of skies; it inhales the ozoneladen breezes of the rolling Pacific ocean; it is laved by the warmest and merriest of waters, while its outlook, stretching across both plain and bav to the ice-clad highlands beyond, takes in a hundred miles of lofty, snowv ranges at a glance. Stirred to vigorous activity by the holiday season, it extends its genial hospitality to thousands. Countless feet parade its firm, sandy waterfront, making for its famous Cave Rock or following the charming curve of the bay to reach the many points of vantage amongst the picture gardens of Chiton and Scarborough. But it is in its whiter moods that it manifests itself in its wealth of humour and evenness of temper. p«o fogs distort its charms or heavy frosts bind up its sympathies. It is kissed by the morning rays of s sun pouring its warmth through a crystal clear atmosphere. It is suggested to "J.R. that a period of residence in Sumner would (prove to him, as it has shown others. ! that it is the ideal residential suburb.—Yours, etc.. SUMNERiTE. October Hi, 14*33.