OUR LETTER BOX

Grey River Argus, 22 June 1920, Page 5

OUR LETTER BOX

GREY RETURNED SOLDIERS' ASSOCIATION. n (To the Editor). B- • Sir— l siiicerely, regret that the ld--0 eal Executive have not had the c courtesy to r6ply to my letter, which s appeared in your issue of Saturday n last. One can only assume that they have not had a suitable answer to put forward' to at least one : of my three '•_ queries, and- have, j/heref ore, thought c fit to let jail my x criticisms go unanswered. I am also very sorry that 2 they have allowed the prices, as adh vertised in last Friday evening's r "Star" to go unaltered. There was, . perhajps, one point I did not draw your 1 attention/ to— that was the resolution i,' passed by the Executive at a meeting held recently, asking that the local v .bodies be asked to subsidise the- ball which is .to be held to-night. Now, , sir, do -you Jfrink that it is fair that our Borough Council, County Council, otc, should be asked to contribute to a function thaj is public- in name only? ' To-night the "civilian /inhabitants of x this town and surrounding district, and i also returned "Diggers" not members L . of the Association are asked to pay the i exorbitant sum of either 10/- or 15/- for, d admission to General Sir William Birdt, wood's Ball. Yet, in spite of this r charge, the local Executive have the d audacity (I cannot say anything less), i", to apply for , aid from our local bodies. L l They are not content in c/iarging a & price, such as will keep the .average a working man from seeking admittance, b "out in addition to this they ask him, c in the event of 'the ball not being a fi- ,. ;ancial Success, to again subscribe, Cper c rates and taxes, to clear the Returned t Soldiers ' Association from any fining i cial responsibilities that may arise. I •. think the Executive of . this f >own have entitled" themselves to. the 0 severest censure possible. They have a lot only attempted to create "class ix listinction ' ' in Greymoul/h, but are en- : t v lcavouring to injure the New Zealand a Returned Soldiers > Association as a ; whole. To -put it vulgarly, I think the . ocal Association have gone the whole „ ' hog, ' ' and undoubtedly will come the 1 -proverbial "cropper." At some fui f ':\iTe date I intend criticising the Greys iiouth Executive and their methods. I - ?.m, etc., disgustedly— "A. DINKUM DINK." \ " VOLAIRE-HOLMES FIGHT. (To the Editor). . Sir, — Would you kindly allow me a anall space of your paper to comment on what I consider to be the palpably unfair decision given against the little Aussie boy, on Saturlay last. Being in a most prominent position and' knowing the finer points »f present-day boxing, I have come to the conclusion that the referee knows little or nothing about the game. I ?rant that Volaire might have ha<l a flight advantage of the rounds .9', 11 and 15, but if any man can prove that hree rounds out of 15 should get-o - /ictory decision it is beyond me. In < fact I don't see why a fighter should J trouble so much about giving, bis bost. ( In my opinion, as a clean sportsman, I < im afraid it is going to encourage/ / crook and shady work amongst young i . loxers. I am sure it was a more glar-' ■* ing wrong decision than the one given ( •n the contest between the late Les ' Darcy and Fritz Holland in Sydney, \< which I witnesesd, and I am sure that v [ am not alone in saying so. Trust- ] ing this state of affairs will be recti- d (led in future contests, and, give honour j to where honour is due, and not encourage ill-feling amongst spectators i as happened on Saturday. — I am, etc., A. SILLARS^ . < Ex-welterweight, Gibraltar. ! [Whilst publishing the above let- * ter we do not in" any way associate ( ourselves with the opinions express- J cd — : Editor, "Argus."] '■■„ ' A HOKITIKA COMPLAINT. (To the Editor.) ' S a\-r- Would you allow me through your valuable columns, to enter a protest against the. treatment meted out fco witnesses waiting to be called *o various cases. On last, the usual request was made at the commencement of the .. Lpckington- case, jfchat all witioesses leave the couit. Judge the surprise when the persons waiting to be called did, as they were bid but found that there, was no waitng room of any description to adjourn to, and there was nothing for them. to do but ge through the unenviable experience of having to. stand in -the coM. pd wet porch until they were called, or Ihis was likely to happen at any it was impossibe to cross even to the shelter sH a- friendly verandah on ,the opposite side of the stieet, I think that this is a most disgraceful way to treat witnesses and I sincerely '-ihope thta before the next Supreme Court •sitting "that there is some place erected where waiting witnesses may adjourn to. lam etc, nn „ ■ ■ "V1SITOB."