OUR READERS’ OPINIONS.

Gisborne Times, Volume L, Issue 5138, 2 April 1919, Page 7

OUR READERS’ OPINIONS.

WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF PROHIBITION IS CARRIED. (To the Ed**or). Sir, —Even the puniest wowser in the town will admit that the working man in New Zealand prides himself on his individual independence and fully resents any restrictions placed on his liberty as to whether he shall indulge in a glass of beer or whisky, as he regards such a law as prohibition as an unwarrantable interference with his personal liberty. Even those cute prohibitionists, fortified with the thousands and thousands of pounds sterling contributed by a certain class of capitalist, have practically admitted that the capture of the Labor unions has .been a failure, and have now made a. virtue of necessity by trusting to their old expedient of roping in. to their cause that section of weak-minded men and women who will iot think for themselves, buv%qke ; ny fairy tale those well-paid pronibi ionists pour into their sweet earsSj Touching on tte failure of the prohibitionists td cloture the Labor unions, at an en< rmouVexpense, perhaps it would > apropos just now for me to mention, as 1* staunch Laborite, that tlifere are hundreds’ of us who drink a glass of beer and think it is, as it is, an innocent drink. Suppose the prohibitionists stop our beer. The result will mean that we will have to drink whisky—and no doubt very bad whisky made in illicit stills. Then we will naturally say: “You abolish the poor man’s harmless drink and leave to the rich their imported liquors and stored-up wines.” Even the prohibitionist will admit that it is not wise to kindle such resentments while the labor trouble is in a state of ferment. That the working man is imbued with all that appertains personal liberty goes without saying, and any undue interference with that within reason will be resented. I am. your etc., WORKING MAN.***

A PEACE MEMORIAL PROPOSAL. (To the EditorSir,—l read in your valuable columns of a meeting held and proposal made to make our beach the site tor a Peace Memorial. This is undoubtedly a step in the right direction, as w© htiv© on the TVaikaiiae <t besten, equal (if not superior) to any beach in, New Zealand. But why spend £IOOO on Harbor Board property that can only be held until wanted by the Board for harbor purposes, and why encournSf’ the public to bathe in the most dangerous part as our engineer (Mr Leslie Reynolds) said, “The safest part of the beach was from Grey Street to the leading lights-. Then, ~ again, as the Borough Council are the parties who are responsible for the War Memorial, why do not they take this opportunity to relieve themselves of the responsibility that rests on their shoulders and utilise, for tho purpose, the freehold land that was given to them some 15 or 16 years ago for an Esplanade? Apparently, after this foreshore had been, cut up and sold, the Council began to realise that they had lost the “lungs” of the town, so they sent round a request to all owners of frontages, stating that if they would give 15 feet off each section, they (the Council) would erect an esplanade, plant shelter trees, etc., for the public of Gisborne. This, all owners agreed to do, with the result that fences were put back accordingly. What would have become of Napier’s foreshore., had not the progressive Mayor and Councillors undertaken to have their fine Marine wall erected? An, estimate has, I believe, been obtained for our foreshore protection, and is something like £IO,OOO. Would not this be a' more lasting and worthy memorial to our brave heroes, and remain for all time? There could be an obelisk on the frontage to mark the purpose for which it was erected and could be seen by all boats passing or entering our bay. Would not this be both an, ornament and credit to a wealthv district like this, that can export in one shipment alone the War Castle products to the value of close _on half a million pounds. Trusting that •I am not trespassing too much on your space, and hoping that an abler pen than mine will take the matter „p._l am, etc.. FAIBPI/A5 .

MR HAWES AND “NONBOLSHEVIK.”

(To trie Editor).

Sir, — If the .cause is just and honorable, that your correspondent signing himself Non-Bolshevik has undertaken to uphold- and defend, how is •it that he has not the manliness and courage to sign his name instead ol hiding behind a nom-de-plume. Until “Non-Bolshevik” has the manliness to sign his correct name I must decline to reply to his letter, even his nom-de-plume, according to a casual glance only of his tetter, is sufficient to convince anyone that it is a misnomer. Let Non-Bolshev k sign his name to his letter, and I will then _clo my best to reply to every question he asks, and will deavor to prove to him that I an more of a friend than an opponent of the working man. But tlns will not prevent me from speaking plan to those men, and to point opt to them any mistakes I think they a entering into. J will also undertake to prove other fallacies or rat - er injustices, perpetrated by unions upon their fellow workers may be unconsciously, but none the les® . I cannot, Sir, refrain from mention ing that beautiful quotation made by “Non-Bolshevik” at the end of his letter. It caused tears to spr g into my. eyes, and brought so very jvivdly be? "re nip .the memory 5' d»n.rl ■ -v /he & V>ry •iP' dnoHatic/v£ry’ oft*3 '-V of Jil&n ',g—and l?e will <rm, etc., A. HAWES.