LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 33068, 8 November 1972, Page 16

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

*U Letters to be considered for this column must not exceed 150 words. They should be on only one side of the paper; preferably typewritten, otherwise clearly written in ink; and ample margins and space between lines should be left for convenience in sub-editing. (2) A legible signature and full address—not a P.O. box number — are required whether these are to be printed or not <3> The correspondent must say whether the letter has been or is to be submitted elsewhere. (4) The editor cannot return or keep any letter not accepted for printing; nor does he undertake to acknowledge or enter into correspondence concerning letters, although an acknowledgement will be made where this seems to be necessary or helpful. (5) As a general rule, correspondence on news items in other publications, or carried on radio and television, is not acceptable.

Andrew Henderson.—Not open for discussion in this column. Exam.—No space to persue the subject. Mug Shot.—For our protection; not hers. Mark D. Sadler.—No space for further discussion of the Paparoa Mine. M. McCulloch.—We are seeking Mr Kirk’s comment on your earlier letter, but doubt the relevance of this one. “John Wesley Harding.”—You might not approve the Labour Party’s proposals for dealing with “bikies,” but the extravagance of your criticism could hardly promote useful discussion.