BROKEN PROMISES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 23542, 4 July 1938, Page 7

BROKEN PROMISES

TO THE EDITOR Sir,—ln his last letter "Taxpaying Frog” essays to follow up the subject of “ broken promises,” but his letters reveal an apparent incorrigible proclivity to run off into irrelevancy. I am somewhat nonplussed as to why so many extraneous subjects have been introduced. I expected some elucidation of “Taxpaying Frog’s” rash statements concerning the alleged perfidy of the Prime Minister, but in a letter occupying seventeen inches of space very little light is cast upon it, “Taxpaying Frog” complains about the new “old” National Party being referred to as the “old gang.” Such an appellation may seem a little crude, but it is certainly expressive and near to “ bull’s-eye accuracy.”

I have more than a vague suspicion that “ Taxpaying Frog ” has much over-

reached himself in his anxiety* to put a new veneer over the old NationalCoalition Party, etc. By a curious feat of mental acrobatics he declares them to be “first timers” and “talented actors,” making their debut upon the political platform. In my cleverest psychological mood I completely fail to discover even hidden talents among our friends of the Opposition. They • may be quite good actors, ists, tight rope walkers, etc., for ought I know, but these accomplishments are - not necessary appurtenances of a good ' politician, on the contrary, a political, acrobat usually ends up outside thering and wrong side up. In graphic, if not elegant, phrase. “ Taxpaying Frog ” launches an abusive tirade against the Government. A little previously, he was obecting, with. a whimsical touch of irony, to the' “ habitual courtesy ” of Labourites in . using such terms as “ old gang,” etc., and in the next breath he lashes out; in riotous profusion, using such “ cour-, teous ” and colourful phrases as • “odious Socialistic Frankenstein, ; “hideous monster.” etc. Your correspondent is wrong in his ' assertion that Christ did not advocate', compulsory transference of property.; What about Annaias and Saphira, the; rich ruler, and the fact of the disciples, having one bag and all things in com- , mon? It is also an erroneous assertion . that this is a plank in the Labour, Party’s platform. “Taxpaying Frog ; takes a flippant and ambiguous little ramble into ethics, and, preoccupied with Mr Savage’s supposed guilt, twists , and tangles this part of my letter outof recognition. For one thing I have . not, as yet, made any admission to the effect that Mr Savage is guilty of any political offence:. Seeing that “ Taxpaying Frog’s ” ingenious catburglar thesis is founded upon a wrong assumption, I shelve it as; he has done with much that I have put forth for assimilation or refutation. Your correspondent will arrive much nearer the centre of truth when he throws off personal antipathies and breaks \ through party complex.—l am, etc., Oamaru. June 30. Lofty.