CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 26 October 1921, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

PREVENTION OF UNEMPLOYMENT. (To the Editor.) —tms Is to answer another part of your criticism of my scheme for the prevention of unemployment and the financing of New Zealand without going on the British Stock Exchange. You say to regulate our Imports so that they shall not exceed our exports is Impossible. I say there Is nothing impossible. A few years ago people would say that it was Impossible to send messages by wireless, which Is far more wonderful than limiting our Imports. There are articles of food and clothing which can and are manufactured here being Imported from other countries, while the factories are retrenching their employees, because they are unable to keep going. The warehouses here are full of boots, etc., which have been imported from Australia, America and Britain, with the result that the boot operatives and others are walking the streets with no money in their pockets to buy the necessary food and clothing, while in some cases the grocer and various tradesmen who give some of them credit have to whistle for their money. Then, again, far too many motor cars and other luxuries have been Imported into this country. The farmers are now crying out for retrenchment in the Civil Service, but the farmers have been the chief transgressors in this direction. If motor cars are an absolute necessity, then the Government should subsidise a company to manufacture here, and so keep the money and work in our country. We could regulate our imports by Government supervision. No imports should be allowed to exceed the previous month’s exports, and nothing should be imported that we can produce iu sufficient quantities lure. Our ideal should be to become as self-contained as possible. This, I am sure, Is true economy. The old-fashioned ideas of economy must go. They have proved they are wrong. If, as ycu say, they are the correct economic laws, how is it that men like Rockefeller, Carnegie, Pierpont Morgan and others become multimillionaires. De they produce these vast stores of wealth? Have they not enough wealth and prestige that o>r Governments should assist to increase their vast stores of currency at the expense of the people by borrowing money from them at high rates of interest? I think the time has come for our statesmen to use their heads to the best advantage and establish a State bank and State mint. It is easy to borrow, but very hard to pay back and again be on the square. You say my arguments are unsound. I think by now I have shown you that the old so-called economic laws are unsound, and have proved their unsoundness, and the only men they benefit are the usurer and the gambler. I recognise that we cannot altogether cut out the gambling element, but we can if we are willing regulate It for the benefit of the whole people.-—I am, etc., PROFIT.

[Our correspondent, as we have sought to show on previous occasions, Is hopelessly at sea, and we are afraid that anything we may say to put him right will be wasted effort. His premises are wrong, and therefore his arguments are as unsound as they are Ineffective; indeed, we would be justified in terming them absolutely ridiculous.—Ed.J

PUNGAREHU AFFAIRS. Sir,—-Will you kindly find room in your correspondence column for this reply to statements ; rrade by your local correspondent, as I think I am voicing the general opinion here? Our worthy local correspondent was’ evidently not well informed on the proceedings to elect a local hall committee, so I will take the liberty of putting the writer right. Owing to some dissatisfaction with our last season's committee, a special (meeting was held, seven (and not six, as stated by your correspondent) being elected for the forthcoming season. Evidently your’ correspondent was not aware that "the former secretary of the trustees, who retained his position, making a seventh,” (Mr. Guild), headed the list in the poll. The strong voting for the two lady members, both of whom have done yeoman service in the past, decided the feeling with regard to lady members on the committee. Last year we were fortunate in having the services of a lady capable of holding the position of chairman, secretary and general committee, in fact the whole outfit, so we do not feel justified in excluding the fair sex from our weighty affairs of state. The present lady members, strangely enough, feel rather indignant at your. correspondent's tactful suggestion of giving way to two returned soldiers. Still more strangely, the returned soldiers do not feel at all grateful for the writer’s kindly interest, and I would respectfully suggest that she bestow her gympatty in a more deserving direction. We shrink from the fierce limelight of public life, and hate to be dragged by the ears into social wrangles. As there are two returned boys cn the counmittee, we feel that we are well represented. It is a pity that our worthy local correspondent had not seen fit to attend the meeting, where her sound advice would have been much appreciated. From her remarks in reference to the newly-formed Tennis Club, I gather that she does not approve of our seeking amusement outside of the farm. Personally I agree with her that playing "I spy” with refractory cows in a muddy yard is far more exhilarating and healthful than tennis, but why couple it witn croquet, golf, horse-raxring, puss in the corner, or other derogatory forms of sport? In conclusion, I would respectfully remind our worthy local correspondent that she should not permit personal bias to influence her newsletter, and, above all, not to write In the early morning. I often feel that way myself. —I am, etc.. "SOUR GRAPES."

FINNERTY ROAD BRIDGE AND CR. WALTERS’ CHALLENGE. To the Editor. Sir,-— Airing neighbors’ grievances (be they public or private) through the Press seems quite out of place; but, Cr. Walter having Issued a challenge to me, I ask for space to reply and give some facts that have led up to the said challenge. Finnerty Road is the boundary between Eitham and Stratford Counties, Stratford County having control. Eitham County was notified that the bridge wanted renewing. Councillors of each county, with their respective engineers, met in the Eitham county office and decided that the two engineers confer and prepare plans of a bridge to cost £lOOO. Stratford, having control and supervision during the building, met the payments, and on completion sent an account to Eitham County for £1417 odd, the half-share of the cost, this being greatly in excess of the estimated cost agreed upon. The Eitham County appointed a committee, consisting of the chairman, riding members, engineer and clerk, to examine accounts, inspect bridge, etc., and, on reporting, the council decided to ask for fuller details of expenditure and credits. In discussing this request the Press reports credit Cr. Walter with saying tlat the Eitham Council were quibbling for the purpose of holding up payment of account. This statement was resented by the committee, and the clerk wrote to the Press denying the statement made, and expressing justification of the council’s desire for fuller information, quoting figures as to cost of work and material, as at September 18, 1920. In discussing this letter at the monthly meeting Stratford councillors expressed the opinion that the clerk had no right to reply to the statements made, Cr. Walter saying that the letter was misleading and full of inaccuracies. Later a committee was appointed to confer with the Eitham Council, with a view to settlement, a meeting taking place on Spetember 23, and resulting in the account being reduced to £1350 16s 10d, in full settlement of the claim, or a reduction of £66 19s Id (by the way, this amount was not discount on account of prompt payment), a result fully justifying the Eitham Council in asking for fuller details. Cr. Walter, reporting to bls council, stated that a settlement had betn made, which he considered most Falisfaetory.

Eitham Council has been charged with quibling for the purpose of holding up payment of an account, and their clerk with writing “misleading and inaccurate statements” in answer to the above charges, and Cr. Walter has had a challenge to prove or withdraw them. Surely after tilts “satisfactory settlement” It Is up to him to withdraw or prove them. Now, sir, the law gives the right to private persona and pubUe taodlw of askUg for fuUar

information or details of accounts rendered from tradesmen and others they have dealings with, which, I think, does good, as it tends to restrict profiteering. Surely this applies to local bodies having dealings with each other, and any comment from tradesmen, councillors or others, on receipt of such re* quest, should be given behind closed doors. With regard to Cr. Walter’s challenge, 1 think the condition of "Heads I win tails you lose,” as suggested by him, is not fair to Eitham ratepayers or myself, and that I should have the right of saying which institution (Stratford or Hawera) should benefit by his £2O. In conclusion, I would ask Cr. Walter to broaden his views and not run away with the idea that Stratford is the hub of Taranaki, and that the Stratford hospital is the only institution in need of funds. Thanking you in anticipation.— l aun, etc., C. E. MoGUINNESS. Mangatokl, October 24.