ah? (£lnifiMmrrh Btixv PUBLISHED BV New Zealand Newspapers Ltd. MONDAY, JULY 23, 1934. VULNERABLE ENGLAND.

Star (Christchurch), Volume LXVI, Issue 20364, 23 July 1934, Page 6

ah? (£lnifiMmrrh Btixv PUBLISHED BV New Zealand Newspapers Ltd. MONDAY, JULY 23, 1934. VULNERABLE ENGLAND.

r T''HE Air Ministry lacks proper imagination if it is asking Londoners to accept cheerfully a week of sleepless nights during the experimental air raid without providing them with any counter diversion. It is probable, of course, that every Cockney, anxious to back the winner, will have some money on cither the attackers or the defenders, and for nervous people Cabinet recently announced that it had provided “ funk holes ” for use in air raids. But seriously England is nervous to-day. During the war air raiders came over only on the six moonlight nights of the month and left London twenty-four dark nights in which to make up loss of sleep. But with improved navigation and the science of formation living in cloud an attacking force in these days would choose overcast conditions, the more so as defenders cannot attack an enemy they cannot see. Moreover, the anti-aircraft force is a purely territorial unit designed to defend London, leaving the other great cities without protection. And an authority has pointed out that practically the only way to save England from destruction from the air is to prevent the enemy from attacking by disabling him at his own aerodromes. WEIGHT IN RUGBY. cannot expect to remain in the front rank of Rugby with light if not featherweight teams. It would be absurd to expect to win matches, say, in South Africa, with any team as light as that which lost the Ranfurlv Shield on Saturday, for Rugby is very like boxing, in that a good heavy man will always beat a good light man, and this principle is admitted in the grading of schoolboys teams by weight. This seems to be the outstanding lesson of Saturday’s match, although much criticism could be offered regarding Canterbury’s preparation for the match, even down to such details as playing a curtain-raiser on a sodden ground. We must all regret the departure of the Shield, in so far as it waters down the attraction of local interprovincial matches, but Canterbury's loss is Hawke’s Bay’s gain, and there is no province to which Canterbury people would more willingly hand the Shield. THE UNFIT RELIEF WORKER. TF ANY NEWSPAPER ventured to promote a competition among its readers on the best way by which a man might keep a wife and twelve children under sixteen years of age on £4 Cs 6d a week, it would probably arouse howls of indignation from well-meaning quarters about the inhumanity of such a problem. Truth to tell, there must be many families as numerous who have had to do with less, but in the eyes of the law children under sixteen cost 12s 6d a week to maintain, for that is the rate for illegitimate children, and twelve children would cost a cool £7 10s, not counting the maintenance of the parents. It is, therefore, unfortunate that the deputy-chairman of the Unemployment Board should have tried to strengthen his case in the matter of sustenance by quoting the maximum possible allowance under the Act for a family of twelve children. That maximum has never been paid, and it is to be hoped that it wdl never have to be claimed. Nor is it very impressive to say that a worker with four children under sixteen might obtain Is fid a week more under the maximum sustenance payment than a man on relief work. The man who qualifies for sustenance is really in need of a little more, although his clothes may not wear out as rapidly and his appetite may not be as keen. But these considerations only confuse the issue. Tile fact is that the Unemployment Board, in reducing sustenance payments, is trying to thrust upon the Hospital Boards, to he made up from rates, or on the local bodies, who are suoposed to provide suitable work for B2 men, a responsibility that is clearly not theirs.