LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 171, 13 April 1908, Page 8

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR.

BILLIARD LICENSES. Sir, —In ; 'our report of .- tho deputation to tho Council regarding billiard saloons thero is an' obscurity which tho'general public will hardly penetrate. The by-law of tho city rofiises a license to any saloon in which' any 1 bookmaker has any interest of any sort,, or which is situated in the-immediate vicinity of' a bookmaker's office. There : was some reason to suppose that, the by-law was not . observed, and." that bookmakers covered themselves by feints transparent to the general public,' but opaque to inspectors. ■ The lawyer who advocated extension of hours for saloons gave away his brief by solemnly an- , nouncing that ono/well-kiiown'" firm of bookmakers ill tho city paid £5 a week rent for their saloon. If ho had been equally candid later on he would have told, of, another set of bookmakers who pay so much also for their saloon. The fact-is that by some-of the keepers the .by-laws are- flouted, and a self-'' respecting City . Council can .do .only one thing with the. saloon which the lawyer 'guilelessly sacrified, and that is to refuse the license' which ■ is being held in .defiance of tho bylaws. , May I also- say that 'the deputation are well-apprised of the 'existence, of decent saloons, and see no reason why the city should not keep all the saloons as decent as wo hope the minority now are?— Yours, etc., April 10. ~/.:... , J. J. NORTH. BILLIARD SALOONS. Sir,—ln the " Evening Post " of. Wednesday last there appeared a reporter's observations upon the conduct .of local, billiard rooms. I took somo exception to the tono ,of the • notico and'penned a' reply, -which, however,' the "Evening: Post" excused themselves from publishing', but mutilated my letter.by publishing a'.barct extract .from same, and commenting thereon. ;In fairness..to tho parties interested,, and. in .justice, to.'myself, I n<iw beg to..request you to bo kind enough to. publish tho letter which the " Evening Post'" had not space for, ..and a copy of. which I enclose.—-1 am, etc., . . ..//'... CHAS. MATTHEWS. .. Manager, Aloock and Co. April-10, 1908. [Copy Letter Enclosed.] -. (To tho Editor of: the ~"Evening-Post."). RE BILLARD-ROOM MANAGEMENT. ; Sir, —In your issue"'of'this evening there appears a - reporters observations upon the. control of tho city's licensed- billiard-rooms, also' some remarks in your' leading columns; . As manager 'for Messrs. 'Alccck- and C 0.,. I am in a position to kno>v soirietliing : about the subject, although my . firm is in no- way connected with tlio.control .of tho roonis.'in question. Any fair-minded man writing with a full knowledge of his subject matter .lyould ■ surely havo refrained from the'inniiendoC'S' contained in both aforementioned'notices, arid your attempts-to wind into the minds of your, readers • imputations of an injurious nature without making'any direct charge is an opprobrium. levelled against a' law-abiding association of individuals licensed by, tho city to cater for'the: amuseriient' : of the community..' -'i i -.. T will not. attempt to. utilise your space in' endeavouring .to .defend the 'actiou x of. the .saloon-keepers in their effort to obtain'an/extendedvlicense; such a controversial matter is ono that is best left to the authorities that' be, but I think your endeavour of this evening to prejudice their -caso . might advisedly have been loft in tho hands of those whose particular duty 'it. is to' report upon these matters, viz.) tho Corporation inspector and tho police. '-/. ■ l'our reporter attempts 'to compare the control/and/status-., of 'local rooms to th'o?e ,ih other cities, but his effort is. so . incongruous as'to mako .one painfully awaro that his discernment was biased beforo. his. task was commenced. ,■ ' ; 111 .dealing.with municipal management,',tho Evening Post" has frequently'referred, for purpose of comparison, .-to-;-.the control ofsimilar affairs in that enlightened city,. Glasgow, whoro muuicipal management has been admired and copied by civic' authorities ' almost throughout tho' . civilised world.' It, therefore, 'may not .be inappropriate.'' to here mention that in Glasgow -licensed billiard tables can be counted' by \hundreds, several rooms containing as many as thirty and forty tables, and the cry is; <' Still they come," for there, at least, it is .recognized that decentlyconducted rooms;fprrii; an inexp&iisive arid innocent amuseirion't 'and recreation - for the thousands of individuals who would otherwiso loiter in tho streets until homo time arrived. ;*<>«?■ cudeayoui/to'co-ordiriato tho habitues of bilhardrrooms with . frequenters of less popular places is an unjustifiable imputation, ■against scores of: respectable men—clubbitcs ■who'.occasionall.v frequent a public .'saloon to / play , a game ■ that lias Utood the test of centuries. If in a public billiard-room your reporter , expected to --find'Virtuo) extolled •and vice ..stigmatised,": tnen; I am afraid; his expectations will not":'be ' realised'whilst mortel: man is.propagated by Mother than the : .Divine: Hand.; nor ■ will such reports -as prompted this letter ,tend vto remedy defects .that may or may not' oxist' ' •/ In cohelusiqn, I trust: you, will give this ■etjual prominence to' your reports of , this evening—lam, etc., ■' CHAS. MATTHEWS,' ' " • <"■ to • 'Manager;/Alwlc and,Co! April 8, 1908. • AN. IfipiCNANJ-PROTEST. Sir,—An employer up Auckland way" has been put in gaol; for, refusing to pay. back -wages, 1 viz., tho difference' between the amount agreed upon by eiriployer and .eiti- ■ ployee and ' tho amount allowed by the , arbitration; award. ■ This is right arid proper .according to law.. -But is it right, J liv/iiest, and lawful, or. is. it. dishonest rascality to put an employer in .gaol for breaking the .law, when - scores .of.employees/arc simply allbwed to defy tho law. willingly-,'pub-licly, and boastfully? 'Why'are'tho butchers who struck aiid were fined <ihd refused to pay not. m gaol ? Wily are tho; miners'.who have struok, and are still on striko, and have been-fined, through their Union, and are personally liable, not in gaol? „Tho employer now m gaol has paid the line, but not, tile back wages; while the-others will neither pay nor work according'to the award.- If the employer. has rightly been mado to pay 'backwages or go to-gaol, what about theso who have, by striking, " which is breaking the law," compelled employers to pay wages above the Arbitration, Court award? Should they not be made to' refund the amount squeezed out-of the employers illegally ? "Are the,cases not'exactly similar? Employers make contracts at'certain prices depending upon paying Arbitration Court rates.' , The employees see their chance; and strike, for higher wages, and/defy all law, knowing that those who crawl ,for Unionist votes dare not carry out tho law. Is this not deserving of gaol as much as the. caso of tho omployer now in gaol? Some time ago, two newspapers were discussing the Arbitration Act. Ono.said,it was a failure, as it had not prevented strikes. The other replied that I it 'was' as successful as, the. law against stealing, which had not abolished robbery. However, they, both failed- to see the 'difference. Tho first-mentioned thieves, when <• caught] are gaoled, and. all: stolen goods found returned to tho rightful'owners. But' tlie other (the strikers)-are,'allowed to keep all they ' gain- (viz.,. extra wa£cs : above/what is lawful) and aro let'go .scot-free as .well. Spe what prospective votes can do when the' present stamp' of politicians aro at tho head of these affairs...' '. ■_ , ' '•'/'" ■ 'Is .it''not timo..that .employers..in a body defied the "law, as the .strikers , are; doing,' and compel Sir Joseph: Ward and Company,' -x#fa o are, bidding for -tho ; support of the' Unions and tho Labour Department, who aro anxious to ,'ploase tho Government,, to;earn their living at. least' with sonio' show of fairness?. Is it not. time .that .a public meeting was called to protest against tho present monotonous injustice? Unionists, now see clearly that they qan striko without fear, and employers know where .they:.will go if they break 1 . the law.— I am, oto., EMPLOYER. : April 10.