ANSWERS TO COKRESPONDENTS.

Evening Post, Volume CX, Issue 47, 23 August 1930, Page 8

ANSWERS TO COKRESPONDENTS.

"Interested."—lf we published your letter we would be asked to publish others iv similar general terms from supporters of the other parties. " Tacks."—Tho subject Is still sub judlcc, and comment cannot bo published. " Candid."—Similar arguments havo already been published. "New Zealander."—lt has already been explained that a High Commissioner would not have the same authority as a Frime Minister at a conference of heads of Governments. "Harassed Mother."—Wo understand your protest, but it would be unfair to blame the organisation for the thoughtlessness or discourtesy of one officer. Wo arc sure his superiors would have been more considerate. " Money."—The comment is too strong, having regard to the vast amount of good work performed by the institution. " Ex-Railwaymen."—Several writers have complained that it is the failure to use a red stop signal (either flag or light) that is the cause of confusion. A. K. Gillespie.—The subject is too big to be dealt with as it affects the interests of any individual. Parliament must attend to the main principles. "Alpha."—You have misunderstood our argument. We havo never excused neglect of New Zealand affairs, but have urged that, if time were not wasted, there ,need be no hurried transaction of domestic business in order to permit representation at the Imperial Conference.