Readers Write

Northern Advocate, 15 December 1938, Page 8

Readers Write

Many things have been suggested as part of the Centennial memorial. I think a clump of young kauri trees on Parahakf, arA CENTENNIAL ranged to form MEMORIAL. the figure 1940, would be a good one. | Parah'aki will yet become one of the scenic assets of Whangarei, and! a Centennial group of kauris would | not be the least/interesting feature,' land cne that would increase with the I passing centuries. ! Northland is the home of the k'auri, 1 and what more fitting than a memor-' ial to our forest giants, now almost! extinct? A suitable setting would! be a ring of puriri, pohutukawa, etc.,, around them. In time the kauris would lift their lordly heads above everything, 'and become a conspicu-! ous feature from all parts of the town.! If Whangarei gives a lead, other 1 centres would probably follow suit,, and the pride of each would become, its Centennial clump of kauris, a liv-j ing monument to their fallen ances-< tors that have played such 'a part in) Northland’s history.—“KAURILAND- j ER.” \

It is difficult to understand why New Zealand should not yet have founded some lasting memorial to her greatest son; and there could RUTHERFORD be no more fitting OF NELSON, way of marking the people’s appreciation of his life and work than by adopting the suggestion of the Physical and Mental Welfare Society of New Zealand, Inc., to endow a scheme for the passing on to the public, per the daily newspaper, of those scientific truths of which the world stands so urgently in need. This would indeed be a genuine people’s memorial in honour of one who believed implicitly in the “Common people” and in their destiny.

Take one urgent question alone, that of soil erosion. Had such a fearless and non-partisan body been formed years ago, the warnings sounded for years past by individual thinkers and writers would have aroused public opinion earlier. Weight would have been given to isolated recommendations, concerning reforestation and the consequent prevention of floods with all their effects upon health and prosperity. Were such a scientific body in existence at the present time, public opinion would be strengthened by the unbiassed knowledge put forth by them on the subject of the urgency of instituting a national policy of prevention of disease. One therefore trusts that the Dominion’s national memorial to the beloved memory of Lord Rutherlord may take the form suggested—probably the most lasting and most far-reaching memorial that it is in the power of man to create. —H. H. BROWN (Hawera).

I was very interested In a letter in your issue of the 6th inst., headed “Another New Deal," and signed by A. F. Long. Mr ANOTHER NEW Long asks if there DEAL. * s any real con-

connection between the farmer’s costs and his returns, and if the farmers likes the prospect of working for nothing? I do not like the prospect of working for nothing, I only do so because I h'ave got to. My experience has taught me that I never got the true value oh the open market. There is absolutely no connection between my costs and that of 'ray returns. Do you see? T v ' ; Mr Long asks what is behind the guaranteed price? The Labour Government and the Dairy Account in the Reserve Bank 'are behind the guaranteed price, but he who regulates credit and profit still regulates my income. I am still just allowed enough to live on and save seed, and perhaps after 10 years’ stringent saving (but not of my body), I might pay off my overdraft. Of course, I did not spend the money. Nobody dan. The banks do destroy credit when they wish, | but until they did destroy it they | charged me 7 per cent. I used money I won from production to pay interest and principal. This money the banks could use to increase building assets, or place in reserve, to “divvy” or bonus. My farm and my name were the security for the cheques I issued, plus the entry «irf the bank ledger. When I liquidated the overdraft the bank placed a figure showing a credit that equalled my overdraft. If we farmers had legislation to allow us to make money like that out of nothing-well, do you see? Mr Long says that farmers are literally working for nothing under the existing system. Under the system that continues (I know 'we have been promised a better one), we farmers can never pay all our debts, and so long as the present system exists so will the trading banks exist, taking toll from stock and station agents, contractors, ’butchers, Lakers and a thousand and one others, who must, in their turn, collect from the man who produces the real wealth of this country. Do you see? In conclusion, I would like to tell !Mr Long that I have seen a bank manager sitting at the table at my dairy company’s annual meeting when lie urged those present to sign a joint and several, or he might not pay out our bonus as proposed by our directors. The bank was not satisfied with the product from the factory; it took a lion on the factory, and then came back to the supplier for the real pound of flesh—and got it. Those were the days when we paid 7 per

cent on overdrafts. My factory gets the accommodation now for I*, per cent. Why this is not extended to the land boats my comprehension, for nothing would bring about that increased production asked for quicker than cheap money, unless it be the correction of profits. Yes. we are! being flayed for profit. The New; Deal is well overdue. Now do you' see?—JOHN McBREEN. • ■ I