RICHMOND WAR MEMORIAL

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXI, 23 August 1927, Page 6

RICHMOND WAR MEMORIAL

A VALUABLE ASSET IF LOAN , ' ' IS CARRIED {To the Editor) Sir. —As a returned soldier and a ratepayer, I ask tin- courtesy of your impartial columns to reply to_ ‘’Ratepayer re the above. “Ratepayer" proves he knows not In it" about the details ol the proposed loan when he wiii.es about having to “purchase back’ iho Mar Memorial*. For aproximately £9OO the ratepayers w.ill get (not buy! the Wa> Memorial containing about £250 wortji of new furniture, etc., the present library, buildings and ground, a- res* loom and modern conveniences. Ihe whole lumped together will be a tangible municipal asset worth, in my .judgment, not less than £4OOO. All patriotic ratepayers are voting for the loan. Ohe few pence added to the rates (about 1-lßth of a penny in the £) will wipe out for all time the present atmosphere ot stagnation and neglect surrounding out local War Memorial. Our patriotism comes long before our pockets. Jo vote against the loan is in effect to say: 1 have forgotten our dead in many lands: 1 shun our local memorial; let it continue to be the plaything of enmity and rancour rather than, a virile symbol of unity in our midst. To vote for it the heart of Richmond will be transformed. The old ramshackle library building will disappear. We shall take a- new pride in our Wav Memorial wherein we shall read much concerning the cause and cure of war.' Richmond’s War Memorial converted into a first class' library will become a real community centre under the perpetual care of the local authority. When eacli Anzac I)av comes round we will pledge ourselves anew within the precincts of its sacred walls, to that spirit of concord, unity, and service for others, which, m the name of our illustrious dead, we all ardently desire our local War Memorial to symbolise.—l am etc..

ARTHUR HUNTER Richmond, 23rd Aug.

TIIFLING INCREASE IN RATES FOR A WORTHY OBJECT

iTo the Editor)

Sir, —“Ratepayer’s" letter in your issue of last, evening is so wide of the mark that it calls for a reply. It was common talk that this letter was to ap. pear in your paper; as the writer has revealed 'his identity. His quotation or rather misquotation of scripture is another evidence of his ignorance. Let me inform “Ratepayer” that the cost of the memorial was reckoned before the building was commenced, and had all those who promised to contribute fulfilled their promises the memorial committee would have had £250 in hand after paying for the building; as it is there is owing on the building the sum of £290 only. “Ratepayer’s” statement about “the proposals put by the committee” is also incorrect, The"proposal has been put by the Richmond Borough Council, and ratepayers must see that the memorial should be owned by the local authority thereby safeguarding it for all time as a sacred trust.

“Ratepayer” harps upon the rates. 1 understand' that at *,he present time six persons are paying the rate and expenses in connection with the memorial and should the loan be carried it would only amount to l-18th of one penny in the £.

The proposal, shows what is the object of the loan, and seeing that the two properties and buildings with their contents are valued at £3500 the ratepayers would be getting a bargain should the loan be carried, and I venture to sav that the matter can safely be left in the hands of the right thinking ratepayers of Richmond. —I am eve., CONSCIENTIOUS RATE RATER. Richmond, 23rd Aug.

A MOTHER’S POINT OF VIEW To the Editor) Sir, —Surely “Ratepayer” is considering his pockets over a trifling rate, rather than the interest and progress of the Borough (approximately 2s 6d for '£soo). The slogan snould be “Advance Richmond,” but how can, we progress if we are timorous of launching out cn new ventures? Nothing worth while has ever been accomplished without sacri-fice-—let us make it for posterity. As a woman and mother I denounce the sentiments of “Ratepayer,” for we mothers know by painful experience the great need of a rest room, and suitable place where women may take their children, and minister to their wants. A woman voter cited a case where a mother in indifferent health with two ailing children, accompanied her husband to the local cattle 'sale. While father was busy there was no where for the poor woman to go With her little ones, in their time of need. My friend remarked, “The women will all want the poll to be car. ried if only for that asset to our district.” “Ratepayer” complains that the war names are inside and cannot be seen ; how many people passing buildings or gates pause to read a list of names?

If we acquire the building and secure the up-to-date library our district merits, 1 venture to say that scores will read those names, and feel the spell of reverence clue to our heroes :n the restful atmosphere, and solemn hush of the library we propose to acquire. “Say unto the people (of Richmond) that they go forward.” —I am etc., ‘ ADVANCE RICHMOND. Richmond, 23rd Aug.

THE SACRIFICES OF OUR SOLDIERS (To The Editor) Sir, —“Ratepayer’s” letter in last night’s edition, a curious mixture of humbug and cant, hardly requires any answer but some facts should be pointed out to those who may not be fully aware of the position. All that is being asked fur is the redemption by the public of the unpaid monies which have never been met by The publ'c concerned Ibe interest on this amount is at present- being paid by a few individuals, whereas the .Memorial was supposed to have been, erected by tne community generally; so this is "the spirit of Imperial right and British patriotism.” Or does “Ratepayer” think these gentlemen should still pay the piper while he calls the tune? As a returned soldier the writer can sav that there is not on.- returned sol dier who would not he pleased to pay the small rate involved as ,i contribution to a memorial for bis fallen comrades. Bv what right does "Ratepayer” speak for the returned soldier? If “Ratepayer” had taken up bis pen when the form of the memorial was being proposed lie would have achieved some useful object, but to write now, when there is some possibility of the building being used for some, worthy purpose, makes one wonder what motive prompted the tetter. To leave matters as they are at present is unworthy of the sacrifices made by the men in whose memory the building has boon, em-tecl Their sacrifice did achieve something- - the Memorial is an empty building. 1 am etc., RATEPAYER No. 2. JKielur.ond, 23r0! Aug.