CORRESPONDENCE.

Evening Post, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 106, 1 November 1909, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

"PROFITABLE," BUT IN DEBT. TO THE EDITOE. Sir, — In the issue of your paper of Friday, 22nd inst., there appeared an article ander the above heading, in which it was stated that an overdrawn account of £20,000 is set against the municipal tramways and an overdrawn account of £4000 is against the Municipal electric light venture. On reading same, I was somewhat surprised at the inconsistent action of some of the councillors. Councillor Carmichael expressed astonishment at the position of the accounts. Now, sir, what has this councillor been doing or thinking about (as he has been representing the city for some time) not to know the posi tion of affairs ere this ? He is raising his voice now, when he should have had something to say when the question of increases in salaries of the engineers came up for discussion some time ago, and during- the debate the Mayor stated it was no new discovery, as they had been overdrawn in past years. Why did Mr. Carmiuhae"' consent to the said increases ? Then, sir, there was Councillor Ballinger Where and what was he doing that he, like Councillor Carmichael, did not know the position ? He interpolated : "Then the tramways and electric light don't pay in spite of all we have heard." The Mayor, again, stated : "It is in debt," and it has been making a profit nevertheless. He also staled thatfor the turbine alone over £13,000 had been paid away. Ratepayers, think of it ! It has been openly stated that these departments are in debt for a nice amount, and yet councillors grant increases to a certain section of employees. I have always understood that councillors went to council meetings to look after the city's interest; but, of course* there is too much done in committee. I also noticed in a recent issue of your valuable paper a protest from Mr. Fletcher at a recent meeting of the Harbour Board, when the question of going into committee was being discussed. It was said that too much was done in committee, and that not enough of the business was made known to the people. Well, sir, I agree with Mr. Fletcher, but I wonder why he, as acouncillor, agreed to the increase to the engineers, as it must be known (at least as it has been stated to me) that it would be difficult to arrive at a finality for these increases, seeing the way the agreement is drawn up, for as the corporation increases its plant, so the increase of pay takes place. Where was the interest of the city and ratepayers by councillors, as it must be apparent that in such a progressive city as this is, no agreement of this kind should have been allowed, and no section of employees should be bolstered up any more than others. Sir, I wrote a protest through your columns, and the same appeared in tho issue of the 20th September. I pointed out the state and position of affairs, but no one replied, not even Mr. HisJop, the socalled energetic secretary of the Institute of Marine Engineers, and 1 would have thought he would have had something to say again on the qualifications of engine-drivers, as he has done in the past. Of course, it has been said that the engine-drivers could not do what the engineers are doing. Well, sir, as I pointed out before, there is nothing ii- the Act to prevent an engine-driver filling any position according to the rating of his certificate, and it only rests with the employer as to which of the two ho will employ. Then, again, comes the question of filling the position with safely and economy. What about the accident to the turbine machinery that happened a few weeks ago ? Of course, Councillor Luke stated that it would not take much to repair it; perhaps it would cost about £300. Now, sir, if this statement is correct, where is the intelligence of engineering firms that they could not effect repairs to this machine-, as the corporation has shipped it to America for repairs? I have not the least doubt about it that there will be the addition of another "0" to Councillor Luke's estimate, which will make it £3000. It is to be hoped the councillors will not show as much astonishment at the discovery made when tho account is presented as was exhibited by Councillors Carmichael and Ballinger at the meeting of the council held on Thursday, 21st inst. — I am, etc., CHAS. FOSTER, Secretary, N.Z. Federated Engine-drivers' Assn. Wellington, 25th Oct., 1909. THREE-FIFTHS MAJORITY. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — On returning to Wellington this morning, and looking through a file of papers, I came across your article of the 23rd inst., and wondered, as I read it, whether you had ever realised the full force of a demand for a three-fifths majority vote, as applied to the liquor question. To put the matter in its simplest form, have you ever realised that if the No-license *Party secured 3000 votes against their opponents' 2000, and 200 additional voters voted for reduction only, the advocates of reform would have to secure 500 additional nolicense votes to conquer the 200 given by the voters for reduction? Would any sane man in New Zealand stand as candidate for Parliament if he had to submit to the same condition? I believe not, and know of no reason why the advocates of a great reform should be so outrageously handicapped. — I am. etc., FRANK W. ISITT. Wellington, 29th October, 1909. j SEATS IN THE TOWN HALL. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, — I am only voicing the plaints of hundreds of women in this city on the miserable seats in our fine civic hall. For one thing, they are too high and too close together, and many entertainments tire now not so well patronised as they would be, owing to the sitting accommodation being bo uncomfortable. Several persons (men and women) have exclaimed : "I would have gone to hear 'The Creation' only for those aivful chairs." Surely our Mayor and Councillors, who must have heard this cry before, do not transact the corporation's business in seats of the same nature. — I am, etc., COMFORT. Wellington, 28th Octooer, 1909, PRISONERS' WIVES AND FAMILIES. TO THE EDITOR. Sir — I should be obliged if you could find space in/your columns for the following plea for those who probably ara unable or unwilling to make their own. I am referring to the erstwhile dependI ents of those who are now undergoing sentence in our gaols. Tho public conscience, as reflected by the more sensitive and humane, is already fueling strained and uneasy when contemplating that rigorous, incliscruuinating justice which with one decree condemns . simultaneously both tho guilty man to penal servitude and the innocent wife, children, and other dependents to unmerited aalumny and want. Any one who has had the painful privilege o f inspecting

our gaols cannot fail to have observed how considerately prisoners are treated — sufficiently fed, warmly and cleanly clad, medically attended, etc. But what of tho wives and children of these men who havo been deprived by the State of their bread-winners? Have they even the necessary creaturo requirements so adequately assured to those for whose crimes they are suffering? Now, skilled labour is to a considerable degree utilised in our gaols— viz., tailoring, bootmaking (warders' boots, etc.), carpentry,- etc. Then, why should not these men be credit, ed with some percentage of the trade value of their labpur, nine-tenths of which might be delivered over weekly to their dependents and families, whilst the remainder could be retained against the timo when their sentences should have expired? If members during the present session would pass such a measure as would meet the need which equity so urgently indicates, they would not only earn both present and future gratitude of desolate mothers | and fatherless children, but would have bequeathed to the civilised ■#orld a pattern of justice it greatly needs, and would soon follow. — I am, etc., JUSTITIA.