Citizens Say—

Sun (Auckland), Volume II, Issue 591, 18 February 1929, Page 8

Citizens Say —

(To the Editor.)

STREET NOISES Sir, “Will noise destroy civilisation, or . will civilisation destroy noise?” asks j the “British Medical Journal.” And, as if in answer to the query Auckland’s city fathers are even now taking: off the gloves to fight the noise nuisance. But they are not after the scalps of the open-cut-out motor-cycle fiends. Neither are they concerned about methods for subduing the thunderous roar of their own trams nor the deafening concrete-mixer-like grind of their buses ascending Wellesley Street West. The perpetual raucous honkings* of the latest things in pedestrian-shockers leave them unmoved, and the best efforts of our most energetic gearcrashers seem destined to go unheeded. No, out of all the ear-splitting, nervedestroying noises that go to swell the infernal pandemonium that daily reigns in our main thoroughfares, the one chosen by the Town Hall Solons to “go after” is the gramophone “nuisance.” O Lord! O Auckland! HUSH HUSH. WHERE’S THE HARM Sir,—• What your correspondents, writing on the poison gas chamber question, fail to realise, is this: At the war there were many such chambers, and their purpose was to test helmets and give confidence to the wearers of them. The soldier simply put on a perfectly safe helmet, and walked through a room containing gas, walking out on the other side just the same man as he walked in. No horror, no brutality, no terror. Where on earth is the harm in being prepared? SOMME. BE PREPARED Sir, — The many opinions expressed in your columns for and against “no more war” make interesting reading for the thoughtful person. While agreeing that no more war is thoroughly desirable, one cannot help but see the strong reason for being prepared, j Those who advocate being prepared ' regret the necessity thereof, and desire peace as much as the antiL militarists. REVELATION Nil., 12. THE POISON GAS QUESTION ' Sir. — As a real hundred per cent. Jingo and one who kept the home fires burning during the World War, I feel dreadfully upset to read in the correspondence columns of The Sun that quite a number of your readers have strong \ prejudices against gas warfare in particular, and war in general. However, it has been some comfort to read that * at least one enlightened correspondent [has pointed out how necessary it

to get a little gas mask practice in anticipation of the next (chemical) war. For instance, some lines of gas masks may be defective and let in gas through the chinks and joints. All gas masks ought to be periodically reexamined and certified correct, much in the same way as bowls are tested and retailers’ shop scales are examined. No doubt there would be a rush of applicants for the job of personal tester of anti-gas appliances. I should be one, as I am told that the experience of being asphyxiated is rather a pleasant one.

Someone has already suggested that it is only reasonable that recruits should be instructed in the use of anti-gas helmets in case the treacherous foreigner launches a surprise attack upon us. I should go even further and suggest that the Defence authorities might distribute gas masks and gas cylinders to all our schools, so that teachers could give demonstrations in gas technique to our children, on the lines of instruction in street traffic rules and life-saving already carried on as a schol side-line. My contention is that it is futile to teach the young idea how to shoot if we neglect adequate gas-mask instruction in th« infant schools. Of course our teachers, who are inclined to stand on their dignity these days, might object to having this extra duty imposed upon them. In that case the “good work” of gas mask drill might be carried on with due solemnity in our Sunday schools. Also a few slowmotion films of gas drill interspersed among the comedies at Saturday afternoon picture matinees would be helpful to our theatre-going city children. ONLY A JINGO. PACIFISM Sir.— I wish to beg a little more of your valuable space to reply to “Common Sense,” now that he has directly challenged me. At the outset I would like to ask all your military correspondents why they are afraid to write under their own name. “Common Sense is a very fine nom de guerre, but your readers are the best judges of the amount of common sense displayed. What would I do, “If the United States or Japan attacked New Zealand?” “Common Sense” sui-ely honours these peoples with the suggestion. Are we the only human beings on this earth? From a common sense point of view we would do better to offer no resistance, as we would have no earthly hope of resisting these powerful nations. Allow me, sir, to proceed a little further. Until any step can be made toward peace, some nation must stand hrm to that ideal and be prepared to be martyred in the great cause. No nation would do so until she had the support of her colonies. No colony ■would do so until she had the support of . ber people. The mass of people will not do so until certain individuals have started the ball rol ing. That is common sense. Whether a narrowminded anti-militarist or not, I. for one. will stand to that high ideal, and I know I have not far to go for much support. * 351„ BYRCB.