"A CASE OF HARDSHIP"

Otago Daily Times, Issue 22563, 6 May 1935, Page 28

"A CASE OF HARDSHIP"

TO THE EDITOR

Sir, —Healthy criticism of local municipal policy, no matter hqvr stern is the battle, is of material to the taxpaver who is anxious to exercise his vote with discretioti, provided that all the criticism is fair and just. If there is a code of honour among thieves, there should be a higher code of honour among opponents aspiring to public office. The introduction into the arena of local politics of a dispute between a landlord and his tenant was a grave tactical blunder on the part of the candidate, and simultaneously inflicted a grave injustice upon the landlord concerned. It is because I desire the political life of our city to be cleaner than it is that I,have taken up my pen in defence of the landlord in question; because the candidate* for political honours failed in his duty by neglecting to investigate the dispute fully. It is well that Labour supporters should; remember that not all capitalists are niggardly and that all Labour supporters are not saints. I am not known to the owner of the house in question, but undertook to carry out an investigation solely in the interests of truth, that the actual position might be made known to the reading public. By being willing to accept a weekly rental, stipulated by the tenant, mark you, not by the landlord, the landlord showed that he was kindly disposed towards people who perhaps are struggling against adversity. Despite the promise made by the tenant that he would pay regularly the modest sum of eight shillings per week, he depreciated his sense of integrity by allowing twenty weeks to pass without paying any rent, and without making any explanation to the landlord why he did not honour his promise. If the house is so dilapidated as it is said to be, it surely must be due to lack of care on the part of the tenant who has lived in the house for nineteen years, nine of I ''which were under the ownership of the present landlord. A solicitor had been engaged to plead on behalf of the "evicted" tenant, but, on realising that the tenant had not "played the game," he refused to appear on their behalf owing to their shabby treatment of a kindly-disposed landlord. Hence the plausible excuse that the tenant was ignorant of court procedure. After thoroughly investigating this case, Sir, I am of the firm opinion that a grievous wrong has been done to a landlord who has shown that he is more charitable and humane than the most ardent Socialist. —I am, etc., Sociologist.