THE TRAMWAY PROBLEM.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXIII, Issue 10066, 3 August 1925, Page 4

THE TRAMWAY PROBLEM.

(TO THE EDIT'OE.)

Sir,—ln yesterday’s T.mes ‘‘Dummy Mate’” charges mo with writing hurriedly and with tailing to understand his statement that the £215 (it should be £225) was only 25 per cent, of the total. On the contrary, it was because I understood it that .1 attacked it and showed that, of the tota: cost of pu.l.ng up the road, laving the rails and re-surfacing the street Messrs. Vickermann and Lancaster charged only one-quarter to streets A/c.. while he charges three-quarters If the trams were extended to Maugapapa, the present surface which with a little care, will soon bo quite a good road, would, have to be pulled up, a much inform, road would bo left in its place, and Streets A/c. would be saddled by Messrs V-cker-mann and Lancaster with one-quai-ter of the cost of doing so and by “Dummy Mate” with three-quarters. Tramway authorities, everywhere are trying to s’ip out of toe burden of maintaining the road surface, >u there is a good reason for at least a part of that charge. The nh underneath and the constant attention thev need cause frequent opening up of the road and the surface requires continual attention to .prevent it drawing away from the rails and leaving these exposed m a way tint won to cause serious accidents. Any roa ~ engineer knows that it costs rnueb more to maintain a road with a tram line in it than one without. In closing this correspondence. (it has gone far enough now), I wish, to thank “Dummv Mate” for making vis ble and prominent many popular errors and thereby giving me a chance or exposing them. I Aug. 1. 1923.

“LUX” OX THE LEV. F. A. CRAWSHAW. (TO THE EDITOEr.) Sj rj _lt was with not a little interest that I read in your issue of Saturday a letter with the caption “In replv to Lux.” Perhaps. I should have felt honored that its author was one, “F. A. Crawshaw,” who, I am (riven to understand, was trained for service in the Anglican Church and made a somewhat belated change over to the Baptist fraternity. But I must really confess to a feeling of been disappointment in that I fail to note any indication that he applauds Mr. Aitken’s theological courage in placing his scholarly views before the public- per medium of the press. Mr. Grawshaw should have been one of the first to compliment Mr. Aitken on his attitude, which amounts to this: that we must listen not only to what can be regarded as the \ oice or in Scripture but also to His oice through “all that whereby He makeih Himself known.”

Earth’s crammed with Heaven. And even.' common busn nfire with God * But nnlv lie who sees takes off his shoes.

Mr. Orawsbaw is. seeminglv. nothing if not impetuous. He teils your readers, quite- unashamedly, that he rushed into this controversy in almost a eomulete state of ignorance as to what it has all been about. And let

this not be overlooked: be wishes us to rest assured that; the ancients were not under the mistaken imrsression that the earth was flat. Indeed, Mr. Aitken. myself and all other students of history may take Ills word ori the subject.. ‘But does he substantiate his rlea. as mould rr.y earne=t seeker after truth —by proving his case? Oh. dear no! He merelv repeats Mr. Black's argument- as to what is recorded in Imke with rererence to the Second Advent. All that is new that lie brines- irto his argument is the inference that Matthews version of the matter beans out Luke's narrative —which of course, is not the position—and the further erroneous supposition that Mr. Black invited. Matthew’s gospel to his aid. If Air. Crawshaw has any special knowledge on the subject, why in the name of goodness did he not try and oxuba>n how that "nan of wisdom” Joshua fell into the sad. but hv hi<: own account sr-argelv successful. orrn- of commanding the sun. instead of the earth, to stand still for a nemod of about a das- in order to afford an extendon of davlight! M r . Craw=hp-< ha« now an opportunity to remedy his omission in a- straight forward manner or. o’~ th° other hand, c-dm’t f'-ank'v that the difficulty about the Jewish Scriptures is their indefiniteness. incompleteness and.contradictoriness.

But nrc the uses of ndvortrieraent-! Mr. Crawshaw eouM not tni'= such n golden chance to tell the stood people of this, district that they may. with confidence. rerartl him as no mean nuthoritv on Tyschntnlogv. It seems that, recently, he delivered quite an instructive sermon, from his own pubvt. on the A* fventmnvhe. r| l ; o on kindred innt+ors. But iis erudition, like the nor fume of the rrve that is born to blush in some arid region, has been lost e.s far as all who did not attend —the great bulk of the public of Gisltorne __pi-o conr-emori. How unforturtite! If Mr. Orav-'h-’W could convince the rows pane vs i hat it was such a valuable discourse as lie now suggests either the “Times'- or the “Herald’’ —or both —might, doubtless, be ablo to find space for it —and then someone else besides Mr. Ornwshaw would be afforded an onoorturitv of assessing it at- its real theological value. Mr. Crawshaw has, at anv rate, succeeded in having the fact broadcasted that, he lias read, and wishes it to be understood. thoroughly greened. Paul’s Hews as given in the first Book Thcssalouinns. certain references to the subject in Acts and that, he has! “discovered'' from the Bock of Zechaiiali that Christ will return to oarth on to Mt. Olivet. Perhaps it will be * enough to mention on this point that much more learned scholars than Mr. Crawshaw have laid it that Zechariah had Jehovah, not- vhrist, in mind in connection with the Mt. 01 ivet prophecy! Now. with the delightful cheerfullies*' of n Mr. Pirn, Mr. Crawshaw. having dropped into the controversy Just casually, as it * were, onuses to make an erquirv. 'Will “Lux,” ho asks, “tell us whether or rot he believes in the fact of the Virgin Birth, etc., etc., and we will know whether or not his supposed ‘mistakes’ in the Bible are worth considering.” Well, well! Here again Mr. Crawshaw sets himself up on a pedestal without offering the slightest, proof that he has all the necessary qualifications to judge and dispose, of such a vital matter ""to the satisfaction not onlv of himself hut also of those who have o-iveu it a great deal more consideration. Can it bo that Mr. Crawshaw does not know that he is merely trying to draw a red herring over the* track? He should realise that, in the controversy between Mr. Black and myself, the point he wishes to raise has not beer raised and if it should be raised at this juncture, Mr. Black might i get lost behind the smoke screen! which would then prevail. In that event. Mr. Black mignt find himself robbed of an. opportunity to touch upon the doctrines of first, tilings which are in. dispute between himsolf and myself. Under the strict riileu of the game it is, of course., Mr. Black’s next move. —I am, yours, etc. “LUX.”