REPLY TO “DECEIVED.”

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18200, 26 February 1929, Page 3

REPLY TO “DECEIVED.”

To the Editor of the •'Timaru Herald.’* Sir, —The letter signed “Deceived,” in Saturday’s “Herald” makes one wonder liow lie ever came to have a friend to recommend him to visit anywhere. A decent friend even if the place did not turn out so well as an enthusiast had painted it, would have held his tongue and would not have proclaimed his had taste publicly. As another Wellingtonian I may say that my wife and I have always been so taken with the place, that I had to throw up a good job to come hereto live: and to compare it with 'liiahi Bay, which is a bleak uninhabited spot three miles from the nearest village (which happens to be Ponrua), is ridiculous in the extreme. Of course, there are hays as good m New Zealand. Who among Timaruvians doubts it, or assorts otherwise. But though I have visited most places in New Zealand, 1 know ol no place t 0 equal it as a seaside resort, as seaside resorts are understood in England or the Continent. The bav is the centre of the town; it has an esplanade, a marine parade, pavilion, bathing sheds, shelters, gardens tennis courts, playgrounds, shruoberries, walks and is well lit at night, and is a typical holiday place, and has no equal in New Zealand. Timnvu is the better for the loss ot all such as “Deceived.” —I am .etc. ADMIRER.