LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23445, 27 September 1941, Page 5

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

* FARM WAGES Sir.—The letter under the above heading signed “Kerosene" is interesting. Ho admits getting £3 2s 6d, plus family allowance of Bs, and free house rent 10s (probably worth £1). a total of £4 Os 6d a week. But "Kerosene” docs not define his duties, neither docs he say whether he receives the usual privileges given to married farm hands. Perhaps he will tell ycu what he pays for meat, dairy produce, vegetables, fruit, firewood, and other items which are plentiful on farms. It will probably be found that “Kerosene” is better off than city workers earning £6 a week, and who have to pay for everything.—Yours etc., „ , AGRICOLA. September 25, 1941, HELP FOR RUSSIA Sir,—ln his address to the Rotary Club recently Sir Harry Batterbee, commenting on the Russian situation, slated, “I don't believe that tnerc is anyone here who thinks that it is not our duty to support the Russians to the fullest of our power in their great fight against aggression.” He quotes Mr Churchill’s policy speech to that effect, and he also thinks that is also the policy of the United States. Now, it might surprise Sir Harry Batterbee and Mr Churchill, too, to learn that quite a large percentage of people, and I mean the average man in the street, both here and in England, are growing uneasy. They are asking themselves exactly when this help can be expected. They are also wondering, if this “Nazi war machine” has to be smashed, whether it would be better to open up a new front as a diversion while we have Russian aid, or wait till Russia is over-run and then tackle the job on our own. On the other hand, if there is any group which is deliberately by speech or action, retarding the “Aid to Russia campaign” it is guilty of sedition and its members should be treated as "Fifth Columnists.” This is not a political question; the war situation is too serious. Russia is not trying to enforce her domestic policy on any other country; Nazism is. Personally, the Russian system of government would not agree with my digestion, but Russia has been invaded, and as a believer in democracy, I want to know what we are going to do about it.—Yours, etc., R. F. DOWNS. September 25, 1941. MEDICAL SERVICE Sir, —In “The Press” yesterday H. J. Buttle, Darfield. wrote: "Doctors should be employed solely by the State.” This was disappointing, coming from one who is generally as intelligent as he is brief. "Employ” ordinarily means: to take on “hands.” to put off, to determine which jobs are to be done, to provide tools and wages, to be the final judge about all conditions of work and all disputes. If “the State” is a Divine Being with superhuman wisdom and powers, this is easy. But if behind the grandiloquent name there are only officials and clerks, and above them a small group of elected persons, it is not so good, even if they do mostly reside in that wonder-city, Wellington. Hitherto, it has seemed to me sensible to let doctors be responsible to the community for doctoring, miners for mining, teachers for education, farmers for farming, and so on. The sage, doubtless with the laudable intention of saving space and holding an car at the same time, has been too brief on this point; by what means do butchers and bakers, when elected, anointed, and trans r erred to Wellington, become competent to make the rules about trades other than their own? It seems like a fairy-tale to me —one with an unhappy ending.— Yours, etc., R, R. D. MILLIGAN. September 26, 1941. Sir,—lf your esteemed contributor Henry H. Holland, had urged that because “our doctors . . . are having (under existing war conditions) a very strenuous time” they ought to receive the utmost possible consideration from the Government when it is proposed to enforce a revolutionary change in the national medical system, he would not have appealed in vain to disinterested and fair-minded citizens. It surely cannot be either right or reasonably considerate to add substantially, by legislative enactment, to the present burdens of the doctors. But whether this will be the unquestionable effect of the proposed legislation has not been made clear by official medical spokesmen. The main ground of objection is stated to be elsewhere. Everyone knows that the proposed legislation was condemned, in principle, by the British Medical Association long before the outbreak of war, when doctors now serving abroad were here and able to record their vote. Therefore, to “defer” the proposed legislation altogether “until the war is over” because the remaining doctors are overburdened, is not only to ignore the basic ground of objection, but means that a subsidiary and accidental ground of objection is made basic—which is quite inadmissible. The doctors themselves urge delay to permit of further inquiry, which is, on the face of it, reasonable enough. If the doctors were to concede that, as a matter of democratic principle, the Government has the right to make necessary medical treatment available to all citizens, irrespective of the individual’s ability to pay for it. would any insuperable obstacle to willing co-ope-ration remain? Is not that the real issue?— Yours, etc., ARTHUR LIVERSEDGESeptember 24, 1941. Sir,—On page 6of “The Press” this morning is a report of a message to be sent to Russia from the Miners’ Union congratulating the Soviet Union on its heroic fight against Fascism and despotic rule. On page 7is a report of a “largely attended meeting of the Otago branch of railway servants,” which passed a resolution similar to that adopted by the Wellington branch, “urging the Government to proceed with the medical bill and pledging its support to whatever steps the Government might be compelled to take.” On page 8 it is reported that a miners’ meeting decided to demand a national ballot of all mine workers bn the question of an increase of 20 per cent, ior wage workers and 10 per cent, for contract, and also, in the event of a refusal, an expression of opinion as to what attitude is to be adopted, Miners, railway servants, and other unions compel the Government to give them all they want. They are also prepared to assist the Government to “compel” the doctors, without their having any say or right at all. If this isn’t "Fascism and despotic rule” will someone please tell me what is? Is this the Government’s idea of “justice, freedom.” and the “liberties that are hereditary and dear to the workers of the world,” for which thousands of our men. and doctors, are fighting overseas? If so, then may God help us all—Yours, etc., TROT. September 24, 1941.