TRAVELLERS TO AMERICA

Otago Daily Times, Issue 17428, 24 September 1918, Page 6

TRAVELLERS TO AMERICA

RESTRICTIONS TO BE IMPOSED. restrictions in connection with the visa of passports of" intending travellers to .America will be observed in future by the American Consul-general. Up to the present time any holder of a passport has been granted a visa of the same without question, but Mr Winslow stated on' Wednesday that instructions had just been received from the Department of State, Washington, which, would necessitate in future a much oloser supervision, and debar a good many people from making the journey bo America. These instructions state that persons whose chief object in desiring to proceed to, or through, the United States is pleasure or recreation, should hot be granted visas.. Where business reasons are given as the object for the journey satisfactory evidence, preferably documentary, must be produced, and upon presentation of such proof, a visa may hp granted at the discretion of tho Consul,* Persons wishing to travel to the United States merely to visit friends or relatives, or for i easons of health, • should be refused visas, but unusual cases, partjoalarly those of persons desiring to obtain special medical treatment, shpuld bo referred to Washingthe applicant to bear the expense of cabling. Visas may be granted to persons desiring to travel to the United States to take advantage of educational facilities not obtainable in their own countries unless reasons exist to the contrary in particular cases. Emigrants, such as labourers, farm hands, mechanics, domestic servants, are also to be permitted to travel, under the same condition. In discussing the new regulations, Mr Winslow stated that a fairly large number of New Zealanders travelled to America by every steamer. Business men were in the majority, while other passengers included 'soldiers on their way back to Europe, and the mothers, and wives of soldiers desiring to visit America so as to be nearer their relatives. The latter class, under the new restrictions, would not be permitted to travel, save under cxecptional circumstances. These conditions had doubtless been imposed, said Mr Winslow, with a view to restricting travel in war time, and because tho United States, like England, wished to discourage visitors who would be much better advised to stay in their own homes.

THE NEW ZEALAND SOLDIERS AND LIQUOR. TO THE EDITOE. Sib, —I think when so much talk is going on by prohibition agitators (in the inteii_si3 of our soidiers) thai those of us who have been in iuigiand during the war should come forward and state the true position <is we tound it. -■ I had the pleasure of meeting hundreds of New Zealanders where there wers no restrictions with regatd to liquor, and I did not see one intoxicated New Zealander. With ragurd to their efficiency, I heard nothing but praise—and in most cases from lfingiisii o thee re who had never been in New Zealand. I see that one prohibition lecturer (see Daily Times of Friday last) stated that, owing to the issue of rations of rum, our casualties were greater than they would otherwise have been. Surely this is a direct charge against thoss in command at the front, aiuj calls for investigation by Royal Commission (at present fashionable); or at least an Efficiency Board. Uur soldier boys have done splendidly, and deserve our help —not criticism. —I am, etc., J. B. REID. Elderslia, Oamaru, September 23. THE MILITARY SERVICE BOARD. TO THE KUITOR. , Sir, —I suppose it would be too much to expect Mr Kellett to give, through your columns, his reasons for giving utterance to the remarks referred to by me on Wednesday last. Since then I have been told that Mr Kellett made his statement after first ascertaining in the court the ages of all my brothers and myself. If so, he will have known that thero vas really only one eligible for Trentham. The amende is neither expected nor required. The board sat at Lawrcnce on Thursday last. Mr Christie (flourmiller) appealed for Ilia son, who has now been ordered to go into camp with the January draft. Note the remarks of the chairman (Mr Widdowson) to the applicant (vide' Daily Times, September 20): "The board could have told him that millers were not obtainable." On Friday the board • at Milton, when Fleming and Co. appe. .or E. P. Powley (flourmiller), who had left their employ but had resumed his place with them. The mill was idle for a fortnight owing to Powlcy's absence Note the board's dccision : Conditional exemption granted. Mr Kellett seems to have been perfectly silent —probabiy subdued.—l am, etc., , 1 September 23. A. E. 1

THE ORMROD CASE. TO THK ICDITOIJ. &IH, —Would you spare space for a list to allow the pubiic to show their practical sympathy with Mr Ormrod ? I do not know Mr Ormrod from Adam, but have read most of this corrsspondence, and I feel, u,k p that some steps should be taken by fair-minded peoplo to express n a practical way their objection to such methods as the Mayor and councillors of St. Kilda and the Gensral Labourers' Union have taken. I have been wishing someone would take the initiative in tnis matter, as I am sure there are many, both in tli3 country and in your city, who would be pleased to hold out the hand of help to a man of the British grit of Mr Ormrod. I enclose £1, wh cli is not much, but I nope will give the lead for which I have been looking.—l am, etc., - , British Faie Plat. Oturehua, Ssptember 23. [Wo are unaware whether a public subscription would be acceptable to Mr Ormrod, although he is, we understand, out of employment at the present timp •as a consequence of the compliance by the St. jxilaa Council with the illegal demand made by tne Gensral Labourers' Union. In tac meantime, we are holding the oontribu tion forv i-dcd by " British Fair Play," and if a subscription would be acceptable Air Ormrod we shall bo pleased to rscci\e additional contributions .is a, mark of sympathy with a patriotic Citizen upon whom a great wrong has unquestionably been inflicted.—Ed. O.D.T.] Mr Boreham and the other apologists lor me ijitoourers General. Union appt'tii Conveniently i-o iuigut tout uiis is not so inucn a que-ouuii of tuc uoiTLCiness, at an po.n La, ol iui' ciriiiiou s assernons, as oi uie conuuee oi uie union in compelling tile tot. iviicia •Council to tuaiiiiss him lrom his eminuwiiuUt. iNotnuig Liiat iYLr Omiroa luay uavu or uone couju ijOasiu.y ueprive niiu o* n.s ngat to earn <ui xioiicst living, or 1 •—1 l:io fcaoae' wuo would aepnve him oi this oi uio giossesD cruuiiy ana injustice, vv u are concuinea litre, not so much with iliu leganty oi Uie act, as with its cthical aspect. it is not enough for Mr iioreham to siiow tnat taere .s suuie law which allows the union ohiciais to persecute a brother working-man. Tnat does not exonerate them iioin biame. ihere is one simple test of righteousness in cases such as this. You must do to others as you would, have them do to you. 'ihat is my court of appeal in Mr Ormrod's case. Mr Boreham has a heart as well as a head. He has imagination, too, as I have often reaLsed, when I have heard him speak on Prohibition and other themes. Let him, then, put on his imagination cap, and consider how he wouid like the tables turned, and Mr Ormrod's treatment meted out to himself. How would ho like it, if some powerful organisation was formed to boycott him and prevent his getting work—if, as a consequence, he ran the risk of starving, or eating the bread of charity ? How would the leaders of the union like to be treated thus? Such questions require no answer. It is because I, too, have imagination, that I wrote as strongly as I did in reprehension of the union's action. I can picture Mr Ormrod's feelings—one man against a host. That is why I plead with the Labourers' General Union to free > their corporate conscience from the sin of hounding down to his ruin a worker like, themselves, and urge them to make the only reparation in their power, by petitioning the St. Kilda Council to reinstate him.—l am, etc., T. Russell. Dunedin, September 16. Sib, —Mr Russell's effusion in Saturday's issue is as absurd as it is untrue. He states, inter alia: "Mr Ormrod has been robbed of his employment ' because his patriotio sentiments are unpalatable to those who rule the General Labourers' Union, incse men have touoweci iiim up anu are doing their best to ruin him. 'l!he union has already thrown him out of work, and doubtless will do its best to deprive him of other jobs. The union would rob Mr Ormrod of the right to earn his bread by honest toil. Must Mr Ormrod recant and placate his enemies and vow they are right, or must he and his family starve because the General Labourers' Union forbids him the right to work?" For wild and extravagant vapouring this is unsurpassable. It comprises a series of assumptions without any foundation in fact. To build up a. case from one's imagination and then proceed under the guise of patriotism scathingly to condemn those who are the self-made subjects of attack is not fair criticism. I say emphatically that neither the General Labourers' Union nor its executive committee is guilty of the acts ascribed to it by your correspondent. Mr Russell must know that the General Labourers' Union has no power to deny Mr Ormrod or anybody else the right to work even if it had the desire, and I for one would like to be Mr Ormrod if , such a thing were attempted. The General . Labourers' Union has been guilty of assert- ; ing the rights of the organisation over the individual, not in depriving Mr Ormrod of . his job as your correspondent would have us believe, but. by insisting that he should comply with the rules of the union and i the terms of the award covering his occupa- , tion or leave his job. This is no less than . all the members of every union are subject | to, and Mr Ormrod knows it perhaps better , than most people. That Mr Ormrod chose , the latter course of his own volition is no justification for the wholesale condemnation showered upon the General Labourers' Union, whose ranks are still open to Mr Ormrod under the conditions that apply I to every member. Mr Russell's attack against unionism through tile General Labourers' Union in order to advertise his patriotism is not calculated to deceive many, and ■is on a par with the many ruses adopted by those who seek cheat) notoriety. Let me say that I have no connection with the ~~ General Labourers' Union officially or otherwise, but a sincere regard for the preservation of the organisations which are endeavouring to protect the interests of the working man.— I am, etc., W. E. Woodhah. [Mr Woodham is in error in supposing that the terms of the award covered Mr Ormrod. —Ed. O.D.T.] IRELAND AND CONSCRIPTION. TO THS KDITOE. Sib, —We have it on the authority v of "Civis" that Ireland under conscription ■ would give us 300,000 first-class fighting men. I can go one better and say that according to Sir Edward Carson, more than that number should be found in Ulster j alone. Now, so iar, Ireland has sent only 300,000 men to the front, so it is high time | that the Government commenced to locate and round up the 5C0,0C0 bellicose Orango- , men who so manfully shouldered their Gerj man. muskets when there seemed to bjs ( little prospect of their having to use them. "Ireland," "Civis" goes on to say, quot-

ing " some London editors, "is petted, over-indulged, and lightly taxed. I thought Father Silk _ had proved the con-, trary, but evidently it is a case of "lie who is convinced against his will Is of the same opinion still." i Whether or no, the fact remains that those who are in .a position to judge do not allow themselves to be guided by the in- ■ spired statements of "some London editors." i'.ven Air .Lloyd George himself, according 1 to a recent issue of the Otago Daily Times, has admitted that many influential people were not satisfied that Ireland was getting a "square deal." "Civis" twits the Government on 'its lack of nerve to enforce conscription. He might with greater reason have twitted it on its hick of nerve to keep its promises. "Scuffling at street corners is nothing," he says, "General Lord French would look after that!" Not a doubt of it. He would find it a conncgial task to batter and bully a people who only resist an act of palpable injustice, but he did not find it at all to his taste even to contemplate the enforcing , of a just law upon a crowd (500,000 armed with German guns', whose leader, described by Truth (London) as a limiteid liability rebel, threatened to kick the King's Crown into the Boyne. "The Government," continues "Civis," fears the hullabaloo that would be raised by fanatical priests." Webster defines a fanat'c as one "who indulges in wild and extravagant notions of religion." The religion of the " fanatical priests" is the religion of some three hundred millions of people throughout the world. It is the religion of most of the men who are upholding the ca-jse of the Allies in the trenches. It is the religion of the King of tho Belgians, who told the Hans thai Belgium was a country, not a road. It is the religion of Jolfre and Foch, as it is the religion of Cardinal Marcicr._ It is the religion of tho head of Christendom, to whose court the British Government sends an ambassador, —which court the Prince of "Wales also recently visited.—l am, eto., J. Robinson. ["Fanatical," it may bo observed for tho information of our correspondent, means "governed or produced bv"too great zeal, extravagant, excessively enthusiastic."—Ed. O.D.T.] For cold m the head—inhale NAZOL For sore throat or tickling cough take som< drops on sugar. Usee either way NAZOI works wonders. 60 doses Is 6d.

FRUIT CASES. TO THK KDITOB. Sib, —You report the heading retailers as saying that they are quite prepared to allow the housewife to decide whether or not they are a parasitical class. As a housewife, 1 have been in the habit of buying my fruit from the retailers in Is lots; but since the fruit-case question has arisen I visited the. sale rooms to find out for myself whether there was any justification for the retailers refusing to pay for the cases. I purchased for 12s a case of prime Sturmer apples, the net weight of which was 401b, and no charge was made for the case. Now, Sir, I have been paying 6d per lb for the same clas3 of apple in the fruit shop. The difference in the cost of the 401b is Bs, and the retailer charges at least 4d for the case, making a total difference of 8s 4d. Now, let us say that it costs the retailer 2s (including cartage, labour, etc.) to distribute the 401b of fruit. There will then be a profit of 6s 4d— a fair margin, you will admit. Now, let us look at the growers' side of the question. Tha case costs Is, labour and spraying material 3s, railage and commissions 2s, making the total eggt of production 6s. From these facts I have decided that justice lies with the grower. It may bo said that the retailer loses a percentage of his fruit through over-ripening. That is his fault, because he has the opportunity of examining his fruit before he takes delivery. If he does happen to make a bad deal he has a chance of recovering during the year. But >vhat about the grower? A late frost destroys the fruit. What chance has' ho of recovery? I myself have seen blossom destroyed in a night. With it vanishes the grower's profit. The grower is perfectly justified in asking the trade to bear part of the cost of the cases. The person who does all the work and takes all the risks in producing the food should be shown some consideration. I quite agree with the decision arrived at by the Labour Party.—l am, etc., Housewife. Sib,—The statements in Mr J. D. Smith's letter in to-day's issue are very misleading. The last case of apples I bought at the Go-operative Fruit-growers' store cost me 4d a pound for 401b. Railage and cartage accounted for "another Is; 41b of absolutely rotten apples for Is 4d, and bags for 6d. That brought the price up to s id a pound. Then I had to allow for the overweight necessary in selling out by the pound, and my profit on that deal would amount to not more than Is—a very different thing from 50 per cent. The retailers have suffered much at the bands of the Otago fruit-growers, not least of all in connection with short weight and topped cases.- It is time that a stand was made against any more impositions of thia kind. The strawberry season is coming . How about the fruit-growers devoting their energies to giving a fair deal to the public by putting lib of strawberries into each pottle. The Waimate growers give full weight, but very few of the Otago Central growers succeed in putting more than lOoz or 13oz into each pottle. "The fruiterers could easily pay for the cases if they got full weight in the cases. How do the Otago growers expect retailers to weigh 401b out in single pounds out of a case containing 381b at most? In one day's buying last season a crate /of tomatoes was 81b short weight, and a crate of peaches was 51b short of the weight marked on the case. I can safely say I can quote dozens of instances like this. The charge for cases was definitely decided on. by the growers before the retailers took any action in the matter. If the retailers had been as greedy as the Otago growers they would simply have passed tne preposterous_ charge for cases on to the public by charging for bags. By the way, I have never bought bags at 3s 6d a thousand, and just now bags capable of holding l£lb of apples cost 16s per 1000: I may add that, although the retailers may be paying advanced prices for fruit just now, they are retailing it to the public at the same prices as the growers who bought from the Cooperative Fruit-growers' store.—l am, etc., ' A COUKTEY FBUITEHEB. Mosgiel, September 25. THE LIQUOR QUESTION. TO THE EDITOE. Sib, —If the impression held .by some people is correct, that all the evils of the liquor trade can be wiped out by a simple payment or £4,500,000, then £5,000,000 or i.6,000,000 would, as Mr W. D. Hunt affirms, be a cheap price indeed, and his arguments would be beyond all criticism. The facts are, fiowever, far from being so simple as Mr Hunt presents them. In prewar days such a proposal would have been "par excellence." Now it is open to all the objections of imposing further and quite i unnecessary taxation in face of the fact lhat 3. change in the incidence of war taxation has not even been discussed by the Legislature. But in pre-war days Mr Hunt [ and many more ~ never thought about national efficiency or suggested State regulation of any sort where the production of wealth was concerned. Yet the evils of. i which he now complains were then more rampant than they are now." The sudden awakening to the i conscious importance o£ - national efficiency is solely due to the magnitude of the war. A significant feature ia i the fact that the burden which the war will ■ entaii can only be met, and paid for, by i ai{ increased efficiency on the part of labour." i As much more wealth must be produced in order to pay for the war, we see that there is a good deal in the " modus • vivendi." The liquor traffic at present is ■ beyond all To attack it favours a strong popular sentiment, and this attack l represents only a temporary move. It i nevertheless helps materially to create a • powerful diversion from the more important • out less understood issues involved in the > problem between Labour and Capital. The doubtful involved in the Efficii ency Board's recommendation lies in tho question whether' the initial steps to be ' taken should commence with tne liquor - i traffic as distinct in itself, or in viewing the liquor problem as a branch of the industrial problem, should deal with the traffic cm . similar lines to those to be adopted in , regulating and increasing the efficiency of all other branchs of production and distribution. The Efficiency BSarcFs proposals are not free from suspicion when it is recognised that all other branches of production and distribution must eventually also share in the reorganisation necessary in : order to yield a greater surplus. If the i board's plans are being prepared with this end in view, then there is no reason for a i separate treatment of the liquor problem, i which would under collective treatment be • divested of all its controvertial features and treated in all respects on similar lines to i those to be adopted in all the other i branches. ' The advantages to be gained under a collective treatment manifest themselves in several directions. There would be no taxation involved for the benfit of vested interests and no sudden displacement of the workers employed—two items of great importance which, under the board's present proposals, would only aggravate the situation that will arise when the war is over. Evidently tho board has completely lost sight of the fact that there are 60,000 of our soldiers coming back to he reinstated in employment. This is a task of far greater magnitude and of far more immediate importance than the vagaries of the board upon tile liquor question. Does it not strike the average citizen that there are no special reasons why our industrial and commercial system should be reconstructed first? If there are, it is clearly the duty of the board to make them public.—l ajn, etc., - W. SIVEBTSEN. THE PRICE OF WOOLLEN GOODS TO THE EDITOR. Sib,—l have been reading "Passing Notes" in yesterday's paper, _ and I was struck by the criticism of "Civis" upon the Labour strikes in war time. What about the man higher up? The wealthy manufacturer, touring the country in his car, selling shoddy at 300 p°r cent, above the price of all-wooi material before the war, and selling it to the relatives of our brave absent soldiers, whose pay never rises, no matter what the cost of living. To quote one example: I have an all-wool jersey sports coat, bought four years and .vhalf ago for 18s 6d. As it is getting the worse for wear. I priced a new one. The cost of a shoddy jersey is 755. I am tho wife of a Second Division man, who volunteered, and has been on active service for two years. Needless to say, therefore, I have to do without the jersey. Can you tell me why prices soar so h'gh? The goods I mention are not imported. We have the wool and the mills in our own conntrv. The shopkeepers are not reapincr the benefit. —T am, etc., * Non Nobis Solum. September 15. [The local hitrh prices for wool are the reflex of the high price: current in the London markets, which rule the world's prices. TV on nre-war rftes aro primarily due to the enormous demand for soldiers' clothes, blankets, socks, etc.—Ed. 0.D.T.l — Two Lancashire women were talking rt tho war. First 'Woman: "How is your lad going on i' France?" Second Woman: "Oh, he's doing well. Aw've just had a letter fro' one of his mates, arid he says our Tom's gotten dysentery." First Woman: "Strange, he's never written hi«ol\" Second Woman: "Nay, it's just like him—ho wou'dn't mck a fuss about tho bonotus ho wonl"