Letters in Brief

Dominion, Volume 24, Issue 147, 18 March 1931, Page 11

Letters in Brief

Referring to the employment of married women on school staffs, “Interested expresses the opinion that the only married woman who should be allowed on a teaching staff is one who has lost -her husband and has insufficient means of support.

Discussing Labour deputations which have waited on the Prime Minister, ‘-Re" duced” quotes a statement by one Labour representative to the effect that the people were looking for equality of sacrifice, and asks what sacrifices have the unions made to date, following with - two further questions: (1) What becomes of all the money, the unions collect from unionists, and (2J whut has any union done for its unemployed members? 1 have never seen a union balance-sheet, the correspondent concludes, “nor do I suppose I ever shall.”

The margin between the price paid to tiic farmer for mutton and lamb and that at which tbe butcher sells the meat to the public is commented on by “Farming,” who urges that farmers should wake up and combine to protect themselves. The correspondent concludes as follows: “The public have got to be fed, but to let them have meat ,at 3d. and 4d. per lb. is too cheap. This same public will give sixpence for an ice, and give their children money to literally throw away, but we farmers are havingto mend old clothes that would disgrace a swagger." The farmer having nothing to spend makes things worse for business generally.”

Writing under the heading “Earthquake’s Lesson.” ‘‘The Structural Engineer” says:— ‘‘While, of course, the president of the New Zealand Institute of Architects was only generalising in the article which you re-printed in 'Tuesday morning’s issue, there.is a danger that injustices might creep in as the result of a too hurried survey. It is contrary to fact to state that the reinforced concrete building at Greenmeadows has failed badly. It has survived, wonderfully, the titanic stresses to which it was subjected, and has been favourably commented upon, with respect to design and construction, by competent judges. It is not possible to design an earthquaacproof building, but something can be done in the way of designing an earthquakeresisting building, and this requirement was not overlooked in the case of the building in question. The building, as it stands, is a striking commentary upon the value of reinforced eonerete and the confidence of the owners and architect is such that steps are being taken to restore the building to its former sphere of usefulness.”