What Correspondents Say.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18393, 20 February 1928, Page 9

What Correspondents Say.

THE GIRL AND THE COCKTAIL. To the Editor. Sir, —Your correspondent, “ Fair Deal,” implies that no one should “ deliver an indictment ” against any wellknown vice on “ hearsay evidence.” Does he really expect preachers themselves to go spying in hotels before denouncing some insane habit? Surely sufficient evidence is available from various sources without recourse to such a -doubtful expedient! Where has your correspondent, been in recent years that he should complain of the Rev W. J. Elliott’s reference to the subject as the “ kind of preaching that does the Church a great deal of harm” ? Does he not remember that about three years ago there was published throughout the Dominion a striking article by an Auckland journalist condemning the dope and cocktail vices of the day? One sentence in it ran thus:—“ The . chances are a thousand to one that the young women one sees in hotel lounges sipping cocktails before dinner, wine during the meal, and some pretty liqueur afterwards, have never drunk anything stronger than tea in their own homes.” Would that journalist have written in such a strain had not the vile practice then become fairly prevalent? Was it merely hearsay evidence with him? Also, has “ Fair Deal ” ever observed in various police and licensing committee reports throughout New Zealand “ complaints about women being found drinking in hotels?” So the “ modern girl and her parents and friends,” mentioned by “ Fair Deal,” have no need to go far for “ proof.”— I am, etc., PRO PATRIA.

RANTING RUBBISH. To the Editor. Sir, —There is a great deal of nonsense talked about girls and cocktails, and theh sentiments given expression to by the Rev W. J. Elliott are typical. Ranting rubbish of this kind shows not only lack of knowledge, but also narrow-minded ignorance. Everyone who enters or lives in hotels, or who attends dances, at the present day knows that the drinking that is done is negligible,- the only difference being that to-day it is done openly, whereas when Mr Elliott was a boy innocence was frequently synonymous with hypocrisy. The modern girl may take a cocktail, but she knows better than any man how far to go. She is a wise young miss, and is healthier in mind and body than was the 1850 model. She pla3 r s tennis with men, swims with men, runs with men and equals men in almost every walk of life. Does this look as if the deadly cocktail is gnawing at.the vitals of the nation? No, Mr Elliott! Sweeping statements about the “ fulsome fawning of fops ” no doubt thrill maiden ladies, but Elmer Gantryisms of this kind make the world little better to live in.—l am. etc., MENS SANA IN CORPORE SANO. “ SIN AND SYNCOPATION GO HAND IN HAND.” To the Editor. Sir.—“ Fair Deal” asks for proof of the allegations regarding cocktail drinking among the modern girls. If he has never been unfortunate enough to live or be near a city dance hall in the early hours of the morning, then he is not in a position to comment on the matter. If he has had that experience. then he will not ask for proof. I do not refer to the majority of the weekly “hops" to which go hundreds of respectable girls; it is the larger functions, with their free bars, that I am getting at. At these functions, and after them, examples of intemperance on the part of young girls are frequently to be seen—a sight that to any decent-minded man or woman is repulsive. In fact, it seems to me—and I don't pose as a moralist—that among the young men of to-day—for it is they, with their cursed habit of inviting girls to drink, who are at the bottom of the matter—sin and syncopation go hand in hand. —I am, etc., DECENCY.

MORE IMMIGRANTS. To the Editor. Sir,—''Unemployed,” in the “Star” of Saturday, February 18. views with alarm the continuous flow of immigrants to New Zealand, each and every one of whom is desirous of bettering his humble position in this country. Weary and careworn at their long existence on the dole in England, they travel many thousands of miles to reach this “land of promise,” away from the unemployed insurance dole and all those schemes which we have been hearing so much about lately, particularly from trade union secretaries, who seem to think they will have gratitude if they can only bluff the unemployed. Many an Englishman now in New Zealand, and numbered amongst the total aggregate of 10,000 unemployed, must find his lot extremely hard, but to have to revert to the d?le <4 would be heartbreaking. Yes, Sir, “Unemployed” is correct and something should be done by every single individual in New Zealand to let our brothers over the sea know the true position here.—l am, etc., ALSO UNEMPLOYED. RADIO AND RACING. To the Editor. Sir. —Please allow me to ventilate my grievance against the Radio Broadcasting Company and racing clubs. For over forty years I have patronised racing in different parts of New Zealand and, when able, still go to the races. Like a “mug,” of course, I help to keep the finances of the racing clubs in a good condition. Occasionally I am unable to attend, and on that account purchased a wireless set and paid my license fee, solely for the purpose of listening to the broadcasting of the races. Now, apparently through haggling over terms, there is practically no broadcasting of races. The racing clubs thereby show they care not a rap for their old patrons. The Broadcasting Company is equally indifferent to those who have taken up licenses for a special purpose. To be logical, the racing clubs should treat the Radio Company as they treat the Press. Who gets the £60,000 per annum from 40,000 licenses? Anyway, perhaps good will result to me over this business, as I intend to throw in my license and cease going to the races. And others intend to act in a similar manner.—l am., etc., VERB SAP. GENESIS AND THE “ FALL.”

To the Editor. Sir,—“ Light ” is that rarity among clergymen (I feel sure he is a cleric) a sport. Too often the “ divine ” descends to abuse of his opponent, especially if their non de plume lays them open to a quotation from the Bible. But I wrote in no humorous vein. I really believe “ Light ” dwells in darkness which the light of truth must sooner or later penetrate. And when that light does penetrate the darkness of “ Light's ” mind, he will marvel afresh af the wonderful works of God (or absolute, call it what you will) in creation. I cannot believe that “ Light ” delved very deeply into those “ cheap scientific works,” else he would never * have strayed from the path of truth and light as given unto us by modern scholars and scientists. The passing evangelist who, twenty years ago, took “ Light ” from the path of truth and knowledge and led him into the darkness of ignorance, could not have known the great disservice he did to “ Light.” I wish I could bring my wayward friend back to the path which he deserted, but twenty 3'-ears is a long time. “ Light’s ” referring to the biological doctrine of man’s ascent from the lower creatures being an established truth, says: “ Since when and by whom ! ” Who else but the eminent scientists of to-day? I will not quote these scientists, for apparently such quotations carry no weight with “ Light! ” To trace the ascent of man from the first living creature, the Moneron, would take up too much space and probably “ Light ” has read a little of the stages of man’s evolution from those “cheap scientific works-” (I wish they were cheap). If “Light” would again study modern scientific works, reading them with an impartial, unbiased mind, I feel sure he would

again tread the path which he forsook to follow in the footsteps of that passing evangelist. My wayward friend wants me to produce a missing link. There is no need to produce any missing links. “ Light,” before he saw the light of this world, passed through all the stages of man’s evolution from the lower creatures. The evidence of embryology alone is sufficient to prove man’s evolution without producing missing links. “ Light ” must bear in mind that Darwin did not teach that man descended from apes, monkeys, etc. Apes, etc., and man descended from some common ancestral form. Man and apes are the different branches that emerged from the same trunk ages ago; other forms doubtless emerged but perished because less adapted to their environments. The apes were best adapted to their environment and man was best adapted to his. The weaker branches failed. “ Light ” need not suffer the torments of indecision because scientists have not produced missing links. A study of embryology should convince any one approaching its study in an unbiased, impartial frame of mind. But I am sorely afraid. I think that passing evangelist captured " Light ” during the impressionable years of his early manhood. In conclusion I would ask “ Light ” for an answer to my question in my last letter. Does he believe in the Copernican theory of the universe? Also, does he believe the Bible to be infallible?—l am, etc., SCIENCE. SAMOA. To the Editor. Sir. —Another “ act ” in what will yet be known as the “ Samoan tragedy ” has opened with the sending of the cruisers. Although there have been no actual outbreaks, the entire police force, including the stalwart reinforcements from New Zealand, is powerless, so away go the cruisers. The next thing will be an expeditionary force, and for what purpose? To subdue an enemj' or conquered people, or to enforce the rule of a dictator who has made a blunder? Well, the Samoans are not an enemy, a conquered people, yet, so it must be for the other reason. The report of and the evidence given before the Royal Commission is at last available, and anyone reading through it will have it impressed on them that the Samoans are children, and must be treated as such, that it is absolutely impossible for them to look at things from our viewpoint. Yet we have a Commission of two of the leading legal lights of the Dominion judging the natives and their complaints according to their own viewpoint. Ihis is proved by the question asked by the chairman, whether even one complaint could be mentioned that was not trivial. Of course, they were trivial according to our standards, but not so to the native mind, and the inability or refusal of the Commission to recognise that makes their report of little value except for whitewashing the Administration. In a statement to the newspapers a little while back, the Hon O. F. Nelson makes a very serious charge against the Administration in connection with a school teacher -whose tragic end will be remembered. Is the charge true, or does the Government consider it so unimportant that no reply is necessary? It is high time that there was a change in Samoa (and in New Zealand), and it might be as well to try a civilian, because it is not in every military man to be a second Kitchener. —1 am, etc., A.G.