CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXVII, Issue 8321, 30 July 1890, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

EXPORT DUTY ON BAULK TIMBER.

TO THE EDITOR.

Sir,— did not at first intend to reply to your editorial upon the above subject because I felt that the question was one that was open to argument, and if you thought fib to hold an opinion different to myself upon the subject you had a perfect right bo do so.

Bub let mo now say in my own defence that in bringing the subject before the House it was simply following up the question put by Dr. Fitchett, of Dunedin, during a previous session, and redeeming a pledge given to a number of working men, that I would endeavour to provide work for them by urging the Government to grant an export duty on baulk timber, and also upon unsorted or unclassified kauri gum. I have done what I promised in both cases, bub have not succeeded. So far as I am concerned the matter must end (as I have no present intention of returning to the Bouse), unless the question is raised by others, which it most likely will be, as I understand Mr. Marchant, of New Plymouth, feels strongly upon the subject, and has made it the subject of an address to his constituents.

The most serious part of your article is that which insinuates that my object in this direction was to benefit myself. Now if you had yiven the subject the slightest consideration, you would at once have seen that such could not have been the case, for this reason, that the baulk timber exported from Mew Zealand is shipped almost exclusively from Whangaroa and Kaipara. The freights from these places to Auckland is fully one third more than from the places within one hundred miles of Auckland, from which the great bulk of the timber cut by the Auckland mills is brought, and from which no baulk timber is exported, making a difference at from Gd to 8d per hundred feet, which, in these days of intense competition, is a serious matter. The purchases are made for Auckland, from either of the districts from which the baulk timber is exported, and it is either because they cannot sell their baulk and are prepared to sacitice it, so that the millowner does not pay the extra cost of transit, or because the County Councils have prohibited the settlers from using the roads for drawing out in the districts nearer Auckland, which is usually done during certain months of the year. So much, then, for the inuendo that it was for my own profit and not the public good that I asked the question re baulk timber. Now, in conclusion, let me reply to the statement made in a letter signed a " Small Bushman," that I had voted for the property tax and primage duty. Such an assertion is a deliberate falsehood. I challenge him, or anyone else, to prove that I ever voted for the retention of the property tax, or that 1 have not, on every occasion that it has been before the House, voted against, or that I have gone back from any of the principles that I was sent here pledged to uphold. I think it a very great pity that gentlemen should be allowed to make such assertions and spread them broadcast without providing at the same time the proof required to substantiate them.—l am, etc., D. G OLDIE.

SECONDARY SCHOOLS. TO Till: EDITOR. Sir.,—Some months ago, when I was in Auckland, I addressed a letter to you on the enormous expense of the secondary schools in New Zealand. 1 ventured also to say that, notwithstanding this outrageous waste of the public estate for the benefit of a small class, these schools compared unfavourably in efficiency with those of Victoria, which do not receive a penny of public money. By a late New Zealand paper I see that an attempt is making to re-organise Wellington College, which has for some time past', been in a bad way. At tl.e meeting which took 'place in Wellington for this purpose seme facts were slated by the governors of that institution curiously confirmatory of my statements. Sir James Hector, in seconding the motion for the re-organisation, said that "In ISS3 the amount received for tuition fees was £'.20(35, and now it was £1291. All colleges in the colony, with perhaps two exceptions, were in the same predicament as the Wellington College. The whole question of secondary education would have soon to be considered." What are are the two doubtful exceptions to this sweeping condemnation I do not know ; but it forcibly reminds me of a certain funeral feast that took place in America once upon a time. The personal friends of a literary gentleman, lately deceased, resolved to put on record their esteem for the virtues of the deceased by a supper. A chairman and a caterer being duly appointed, the feast came off satisfactorily. When all was over the caterer presented the account.for the confirmation of the chairman. It stood thuswisc :—Amount of supper, -40 dollars. Items.- Whisky, 39 dollars ; bread, 1 dollar. Whereupon the chairman, in wroth: "Thunder and lightning-, what in the nation tempted you to waste all that money on bread.'' Sir J. Hector's two doubtful exceptions to the ordinary fare at these secondary schools have a striking resemblance to the bread at this feast: it was scarce, and even then not satisfactory. At this same Wellington meeting the Chairman declared that,—" One of the principal reasons for the falling off of the the pupils was the establishment here of the St. Patrick's College." That is to say, Wellington College, hugely endowed out of the public estate of the colony, carrying on its business in a building commodious and free of rent, is unable to hold its own in an open competition with the Roman Catholic institution which is conducted without a shilling of public endowment,on strictly Freetrado principles. What an admission ! From what I learned in Wellington, when I was passing through, it seems that the chairman of the Wellington College Board was only expressing the verdict of the Wellington public of all religious denominations. Verily, I agree j with Sir J. Hector that the whole subject of secondary education will have soon to be considered. One might ask how in the name of common sense and common justice was this question allowed to go on so long? This question, I am free to say, calls up a better memory in my own mind. .Morethan a quarter of a century ago I was the proprietor of a Grammar School in Dunedin which was admittedly doing good work. Over and above (lie rich landed endowments of the High School in that city, I believe I am quite correct in stating that the funds of the provincial chest were largely used in bolstering up that pampered institution to my prejudice, and to the great damage of the said chest ; even on one occasion to its positive depletion. Resides all this, one public official connected with the Education Department lost no chance of doing me mischief in other ways. And what was my offence? I was putting to shame the pampered High School without a penny of public money. Had it not been indeed for the "dernier ressort" of the provincial chest I should have been the means of shutting up the pampered school. Now, I am in possession of ample documents to prove the good work I was doing and which I was not permitted to continue doing. That is t'o say, after three years of most devoted hard work, doing all the time the labour of two persons, 1 was driven l-adrift into the world to faro as I might. I may be allowed to say in conclusion that at the time I left Dunedin, my second in command 'was a young man whose name was Robert Stout, that was his introduction to colonial life in New Zealand. Lucky it was for him that lie was subsequently driven like myself by some injustice on the part of the same official out of the field of education into that of law ! —I am, &c., John H. Shaw. Melbourne, July 23, IS9O. CHORAL SOCIETY. TO THE EDITOK. Sin,—l do not think that " Fiat Juetitia, &c." has hit upon the solution of the Choral Society's difficulties. Ho may be right. It is just possible that the Society might go farther and fare better ; but it is equally possible that it might go farther and faro worse in the matter of its conductor. We all remember the Choral Society a few years ago under the present conductorship; and it was then, as Israel was under Solomon, at its zenith. Now it has declined ; and declined, as I think, not so much from the fault of the conductor—(he has his faults, so we all have) —as from the caprice of the Orchestral society and the men-singers. Of the Orchestral Society I shall say nothing at present, but a word or two anent the others. Nowadays many of the men, and especially the members of anything like long standing,

; consider ib absolutely necessary, unless they are honoured with a solo, to take no part in a concert. They will sit in the haL 1 and leave a dozen or so of new hands to da all the tenor or bass work in a difficult piece—sit and erin at their failure. That they should fail is nob surprising. The women singers have more grit in them. 1 notice in their ranks members of many years' service working with a will and helping the juniors, whether they themselves get a solo or not. Not so, however, the men singers of the same class. They are either too lazy, too fine, or too conceited to be working members of the Society, unless forsooth they can appear once now and again, and listen, for example, to Santley. When Santley sang, they rolled up galore; and he was not displeased with either chorus or conductor: much the other way. Let them roll up now, help the new hands, help the conductor loyally, and not be afraid, according to the latest craze, of wearing out their voices (indeed, unless they exercise them a bit more they'll have little left soon), and then we shall nob have quite so much unreasonable and unreasoning complaint about our Auckland Choral Society. This letter is written, I may add, without the cognisance of the conductor, who is, in fact, but little known to the writer, and in no way whatever professionally. Most of the game, they say, is sjen by An Outsidek. Auckland, July 29.

TO THE KDITOR. Sin, —Your correspondent in to-day's issue charges the blame of failure upon the conductor. Is this quite fair? I do nob seek to advocate the claims of an individual against the welfare of the Society ; and if ib be proved that the cause of failure rests primarily in the conductor, by all means let there be a change. Bub may nob irregularity, the inattention, and the apaf of some performing members have co- x m. buted very largely to the failure? jf ave the committee done all they could t0 ~U D. port and uphold the conductor, a flc i to :„ sisbon members either fulfilling .' their responsibilities or vacating their ',' ta in the . orchestra? Have they been j udiciouß in the selection of new works ? J „' °"? U A™ allowed sufficient time for tr ieir rehearsal / ? lhese are some of the mictions I should like to have answered b. jfore j. can m your correspondent to nis conc i usion . r know there are some who trace the d cadence of the Society back to t])e dafce £ the establishment of the Auckland Amateur Opera Club If or atoriosand cm]tafc{ig be termed the ' 'dhakespere" of music, perhaps Mr. Miln ' (or Dr. Bakewell) can tell me sometime abo this aspect of the question.-'. am etc . 1 / UK p

TO THE EDITOR. thi f'Z In , answer to "Justitia, etc.," I w> -nfe that the course he suggests is a little jo harsh, and would seem also as if the ivjsh were father to the thought. As he justly says the personnel of the orchestra is , practically the same, and he gives Air , i aque the credit for the efficiency of his orchestra, I will not go into the comparative merits of the two gentlemen, which : must be quite apparent to the musical public of Auckland. Understand Ido not meav. to say that what " Justitia " bays is not true, that the Society is at the lowest standard it has been for many years but I tlunk that a great deal of the blame must bo laid to the members themselves. Now, granting that a change of conductor would have the eiiect desired, I think that a Hula more of that harmony "usually" required m music would produce it, 1 would like to , see members and committee work together in the same spirit, as they had when "Moset , in Egypt" was produced first by them some ■ eight or nine years ago. This would b« better than a few people railing at thf j conductor behind cognomens.—l am, &c., ; Ax Old Member. FRIENDLY SOCIETIES. TO THE EDITOR _ Sir,—Your article in last Saturday's issue will, 1 trust, be read carefully, and i pondered over by members of friendly i societies. Your objection to Government! i audit will, 1 know, be re-echoed by many i Mho are within the inner circle of the*? , societies, and who object, for reasons best - known to themselves, to the rigid examina- : tion which would result from the appoint. i ment of a professional auditor entirely : outside of the societies. The constant occurrence (the second during current year amongst the Foresters in Auckland) of defalcations in the accounts of those officials entrusted with the care of the contributions received, should induce the Government to save the societies, in spite of themselves. Your suggestion that persons handling money should give a bond for their fidelity is already provided for by rule in every society in this day, and still in very few cases have societies profited by this regulation owing to the negligent of the trustees or the presiding officers in compelling the official to find satisfactory bonds. As to triennial elections the remedy would not touch the disease. The weak spot is in the audit, and I think that after recent revelations the most sceptical will admit that the present system of audit in friendly societies is utterly worthless. That the members as a whole are to blame for this state of affairs is patent. Auditors examine the accounts quarterly, and are elected in open lodge half-yearly. As a rule very little care is taken as to thequalification of the candidates who seels office as such. On their popularity amongst the members depend their chances of election, and the small fee paid to auditors is quite sufficient inducement to many incompetent men to seek a position they are entirely unfitted for. During an experience of some sixteen years amongst! Friendly Societies, it has been my lob to? meet many auditors such as I have described. In two instances, at the close of the audit (?), which was declared to ba satisfactory, two out of three auditors were unable to pen their signature to the balancesheet, the other having to append the names of his coil-agues to the document. It may be said that the above are extreme cases, but I am sorry to say that I could relate: many occurrences at lodge audits just as ridiculous. I have occasionally met auditors who knew their duty, and performed it fearlessly ; but the great majority of lodge auditors 1 have known have been incompetent men, and utterly unfit to perforin the duties entrusted to them. The recent defalcations in Court City of Auckland would have been discovered early (owing to the very clumsy manner adopted by tha defaulter) if the auditors had possessed the least knowledge of the science of proving accounts. In Court Zealandia the time over which the defalcations extended can only be attributed to a similar cause, but yet it would bo interesting to know why a large sum like £500 sterling was allowed to remain with the treasurer in lieu of being vested with the three trustees as provided for by the rules of the Court, district, and order. Lord Chancellor.

TO MANUFACTURERS GENERALLY. [PEE FAVOUR OF NEW ZEALAND HERALD.] Gentlemen,— that labour of .-til kinds are forming themselves into unions, and federating together for one common cause, viz., to try and improve their social position as men, which I most fully agree with, so long as there is moderation in their demands and careful management to prevent strikes, etc., I think it is quite time manufacturers began to bestir themselves, and to ask, What is our position, with a rising labour market, shorter hours, and notices on all sides of advances in the home markets? Are wo in a. position to stand, alone each one of us, and sell our goods at ruinous prices, being afraid to advanca owing to the fear of losing trade through the cutting of others ? Would it nob ba better to form a Manufacturers' Association embracing all kinds of trades. We could then meet and discuss our position and protect our interests. We cannot shut oub eyes to the fact that as wages rise we must either advance our prices in proportion or it means ruin. If workmen can unite and protect their interests we ought in justiea to'ourselves to do the same, and at once. By forming an Association embracing all trades there would be strength, as thera are so few manufacturers to form separata and distinct bodies. There could be Boards of Arbitration formed for settling trade disputes, and all trade matters affecting the various branches could be thoroughly gong into, and with such support as the whola body could give to any particular branch o! industry at any time, would bo invaluabla at a crisis. I hope in the interests of those engaged in manufacturing, to see this matter thoroughly discussed through the medium of your widely-circulated paper.— &c, Kapai Boot Factory, Geo. Alex. Coles. Eden Terrace, Auckland, July 29, XS9O.