TIMES LETTER-BOX.

Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 168, 27 July 1901, Page 2

TIMES LETTER-BOX.

MR CANNON IX REPLY TO ME COOPER.

(To the Editor of Me Times.)

Sir,, —I wonder to what class of the community Mi- Cooper, the Wainui sheepbreeder, considers himself to belong whin he goes out of his way to speak in such tn insolently derogatory manner of two classes of society, namely—barmaids and chimney sweeps. With regard to the first-named, how dare he speak disrespectfully of barmaids ? Does he consider them so immeasurably inferior to other ladles'? Let nc toll him that some of the best wives and mothers have been selected by their husbands from tho ranks of the barmaids, at whom he turns up his delicate nose. Now, with regard to the chimney sweeps. Robert Burns tells .us, “ A man’s a man for a’ that,.’ but then he meant that he must be a “ man,” which, perhaps, even all sheep-farmers are not. In my humble opinion a chimney-sweeper, provided he be a good citizen, is the peer of the best sheep-farmer in the colony. I have known men following that occupation who have lived in good, repute ; brought up families respectably, and in one instance was a member of the Board of Works for the popular district East London, which is twenty times the size of Gisborne. Is it not a shocking thing, Mr Cooper, that a common sweep should have been elected by his fellow parishioners to sit at the same table with the richer men ? That man was elected because he had gained tho esteem of his fellow citizens. He proved to bo one of tho most capable .members of the Board, and perhaps in his day may have been as far above his detainer jvs he considers himself above that class of people.—l am, etc., Henry Cannon.

BARMAIDS AS LANDOWNERS.

(To the Editor of the Times.) Sir, —If your reporter be correct as to Mr Cooper’s statement at the last Harbor Board mooting, “ that laud might be taken up by barmaids and chimney sweeps ” (inferentially altogether undesirable persons), I should like to ask how and why ho has' formed his opinion ? As oho of those “ objcctionables ” first on tho list I can scarcely see tho force of his contention, aud for myself can and do assert that I, havo as much right, if it pleases me, to make application as any other person. * I can scarcely see tho force of this very dosirabio person's objections. —I am, etc., A Barmaid.

REPLY-TO MR COOPER,

(To the Editor of tho Times ) Sir, —By this morning’s Times, I notice that Mr Cooper has been making use of his position as a member of tho Harbor Board to make an attack on barmaids and chimney swoops. At them he points the finger of scorn, as not being able to go on tlie land. Well, I must say that Ido not think Mr Cooper has yet got to that exalted position from which ho can afford to cast aspersions on other members of the community, owing to the occupations they’ follow. The barmaids I know maintain their self-respect, and arc respected and esteemed by everyone whose good opinion is worth having, and though their occupation may not be deemed as aristocratic as that of tending sheep, they should do their part well in any of the higher walks of life. Now, as to myself. Though my occupation is that of a chimney sweep, “ a man’s a man for a’ that.” I work early and late to make an honest living, and I have yet to learn why any man—member of Harbor Board or otherwise —has the right to taunt me with being an unfit person to take up land. If ho has worked as hard all his life as I have done I think ho would talk in a different strain. lie need not be afraid that 1 have any ambition to take up land, but if I were to take it up it would bo obtained honestly and worked honestly.—l am, etc., W. Cairns, Chimney sweep. Wha taupoko.

BARMAIDS AND CHIMNEY SWEEPS.

(To the Editor of Times.)

Sir:, —By some peculiar process of analogy Mr Cooper, a member of tho Harbor Board, has associated barmaids with chimney sweeps—at any rate ho is reported to have done so at a recent meeting. There is nothing disgraceful in either occupation if carried out honestly, and cither is as, or perhaps more, honorable than was the securing of native lands as carried out some years back. For all I care lie can personally own all the land in the country—eventually only occupying that little space which the law will grant him of necessity. But his argument is wrong, and it is not difficult to reason that either a barmaid or a chimney sweep has an equal right to obtain some slight portion of acreage whilst living, and obtaining it in an honfest and thoroughly straightforward manner —aye, in a manner not to be cavilled at and without any prospective accusation of having acquired it by chicanery or by methods which probably at tho present day would bo decried.—l am, etc., Native Born.

A COMMENT,

To the Editor of the Times. Sir, — I notice that your correspondent “ Democrat ” attacks “ New Chum ” and advises him to leave the country, etc. Democrat also states that tho “ men at the head of affairs may not have aristocratic lineage, but they have brains, etc.” I for one think we could do with more Now Chums if they were all as outspoken as he is. This colony is too much under the thumb of such a man as Mr Seddon, of whom apparently Democrat is so proud. While willing to give the present Government credit for Old Age Pensions and land settlement legislation, it has proved itself in many respects most illiberal despite its boasted “ Liberalism.”—l am, etc., . Fair Play.

ACCIDENT INSURANCE,

(To the Editor of the Times.) Sir, —Bo accident insurance : This-seems to me to be a big question. Say a farmer employs a carter, by contract; he has his own horses and dray, does carting for other people as all carters do. If this carter or his driver moot with an accident whilst doing your carting, or perhaps has half a load for some one else, who has to pay the piper ? This accident insurance is a big tax on people bushfelling; it means over JkiO (3 per cent) on every thousand acres felled. I see a letter in the Times from “ New Chum,” which I think very much to the point; but I think “ New Chum ” might have gone further, and asked why does not tho Government put the employee into petticoats at once, as they seem incapable of looking after themselves?—l am, etc., Manliness.

IDLE MEN,

fTo tho Editor of tho Times.) Sir, —The cap seems to fit “ Occasional Collector,” or ho would not try and champion the idle men’s case. It is well known that what I write about is truth. “ Occasional Collector ” is done on that point. I am sure the public know right well that there are men idling about the street from one year’s end to another, and in the face of it I find ono of their ilk taking their part. I am sure “ Occasional Collector ” is not a butcher, baker, grocer, or a worker, or ho would make better use of his time instead of writing a lot of rot. Sir, it is a painful thing to see strong men hanging around hotels looking for beer and neglecting to work' when there is plenty of work to be had. In other towns they would have to work or clear out, or the officers of the law would inquire about it.—l am, etc., Worker.

B O A D S . (To the Editor of the Times.) Sin, —As a visitor from Wellington to your beautiful town I was surpised, on reading the Times, to see County Clerk has misrepresented the state of things in Wellington in regard to roads. What he says may be quite true, but he has put it unfairly. A dray might have sunk through a subsidence on a

newly-formed piece of road, but that is a thing that would occur only once in a very; long period. Your County Clerk should bear in mind that misrepresenting another town is not the way to improve your own. My opinion of Gisborne is that it is a credit to:.the City Council and staff. I have travelled all over New Zealand, and I do not kuow of a town that has to pay anything near tho price you have to pay for metal that can show such well kept streets. The Wellington people would gladly give thousands of pounds if they could only place your Gladstone road in their city.—l am, etc., R. Hardy (of Wellington).

THE RIVER,

v To the Editor of the Times.) Sir, —At the last meeting of the Harbor Board the Chairman expressed himself as being satisfied, under tiio circumstances, with the present condition of the river. No mention was made of the fact that about a week ago the Waihi stuck in the mud at tho wharf, and also grounded hard and fast near the upper end of tho groyne. Wc are still “as we were.”—l am, etc., Suburb.

WEIGHT OF COAL

(To the Editor of the Times.) In regard to a remark passed by Member Cooper at the last meeting of the Harbor Board, that all coal should be weighed on the Board’s weighbridge, Messrs Clayton Bros, write to say that their bridge gives the only correct weight. They add: “Mr Cooper should not tax one contractor more than another, or does lie mean to say they will all have to weigh on a scale which is unreliable ’? They would like to ask if the butcher, baker, and candlestickmaker are only to sell on the customer’s weight.”