OUR CONUNDRUM.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 9774, 11 July 1892, Page 6

OUR CONUNDRUM.

1“ Nelly Brown,” who presumably has no address, or otherwise omits to name it, | sends ua the following three “cons.,” in i connection with which wa repeat the usual ; editorial disclaimer, “ We do not identify i ourselves with the opinions of our correspondents.” (1) “ Why is the Waterhury watch like i one of Dr B ’s patients ? ” | “ Because it is a goer.” i (2) What is the difference between the : Waterbary and the present New Zealand Government ? ” “ Because the Waterhury is, happily, ; independent of a Balance.” (3) “Why is a Waterhury watch like a flea ? ” “ Because it goes with a spring.” Now, Nellie, we could overlook your reflection on the Doctor because you may have no particular cause to be gr ateful to that profession. Personally, we don’t fraternise with doctors, and don’t mean to if we can help it. We also would forgive your innuendo on the Premier. You may be unfortunately dependent on a Balance, or may, as is the case with us, have your income relieved by the new taxation, but we caunot tolsrate the exclusive comparison you seek to insinuate in your third conundrum. You are evidently suffering from a combined attack of Doctor-cum-Premier-cum-flea, and, if we may be allowed to retaliate with a little question of our own, we would ask. Which is the worst?