CORRESPONDENCE.

Waipa Post, Volume VI, Issue 252, 3 October 1913, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

(Oui correspondents’ opinions tire tlwir own; the responsibility of editorial items makes sufficient ballast for the editor’s shoulders. It is ncccssary jhat all tetters for publication should bear the name of the \writer — not necessarily fo> publication, but as evidence of good faith.)

TO THE EDITOR

SIR,—My critic, Mr Frank Quin, leads us a brief excursion into the domain of metaphysics, but evidently finds himself on anything but familiar ground, for he does some rather clumsy juggling with the words “ impres- - sions ” and “facts.” Now it is generally admitted that there are | tew places more perilous than the realm of metaphysics, indeed, it has been defined as “one man who does not know what he is talking about, speaking toanother who cannot understand what he is saying,” which definition isparticularly applicable in the present case. Our friend from Isla Bank ventures to inform us that “ impressions do not count, facts only speak.” Does he mean to assert that facts do not manifest themselves in impressions, and that if they do they cease to be facts and become something else ? Then I submit that it is scarcely fair to us simple country folk to spring upon us a subtility like this. We could have followed his argument much more readily if he had said : “ When you see a bull rushing at you with his head down, so long as he keeps it down he is a bull, but when he tosses up his hehd, maybe with it his luckless victim, he then is no longer a bull but a giraffe.” But even then it would be very damaging to the reputation, and hurtful to the sensibilities, of the bovine gentleman to tell him that he had ceased to be a fact because he had produced an impression. Mr Quin next takes us into his confidence, and admits that he moved a negative amendment, knowing full well that it was out of order, which in itself is scarcely a thing to be proud of, and then rather jubilates over the fact that the said amendment resulted in “all” being confused. He does not say whether any of his party were included, but obviously the confusion was somewhat contagious for some of them in their eagerness to be fair and avoid being vague —tell it not in Gath — held up two hands. Furthermore, Mr Quin’s letter is by no means wanting in proof that one at least has not recovered from the obfustication yet, inasmuch as after quoting my figures published in your columns, to say nothing of elsewhere, he says I have kept them to myself and therefore he cannot comment on them. But as Nero fiddled while Rome was burning, we are fooling about a little insignificant meeting of a mere handful of people, which can in no sense be regarded as representative, even of this small place, while the greatest question of the day is crying for a solution—one which will effect the eternal interests of a vast number of children and generations yet unborn. It would have been infinitely more to the point if my critic and every other parent and well-wisher of our land,' could sink our wretched differences, and set ourselves to investigating the cause or causes of the most appalling increase of crime on the part of New Zealanders reared under a system which after forty years has been found wanting. One speaker at the meeting, for want of a better argument, asserted that an explanation of this increase lay in the fact of our being a young country, and were only now feeling the effects of criminal parentage. If this be so, then why should there be such colossal disparity between a decrease of 44 per cent in New South Wales, a much older colony, and a penal one at that, and the staggering z/zerease of crime among New Zealanders of no less than 250 per cent in 15 years, with exactly the same percentage of increased population ? —I am, etc., F. W. Clarke. TO THE EDITOR. SIR, —I have been very much surprised that recent issues of your paper have not contained some criticism of the unbusinesslike methods of the Town Board which have resulted in the forfeiture of the £SO paid by way of deposit in connection with the tenders for the supply of pipes. You would have been quite justified had you criticised the bungling in this connection. A deposit is necessary to safeguard the interests of the Board, and also to prove the genuineness of the tenderer. Non-compliance in fulfilling the conditions should result in a forfeiture of the deposit. As the Town Board will be dealing with other tenders in the near future, it is to be hoped that this lesson will be taken to heart, and that more businesslike methods will mark the actions of the Town Board in its future business dealings.—l am, etc.,

Slip-shod. As the result of enquiries made we were informed that the Board’s official acceptance was forwarded by letter to the tenderer immediately the acceptance was’ agreed upon. Whilst this letter was in the hands of postal officials for delivery telegraphic advice for the cancellation of the tender was received by the Board. There was therefore no legal acceptance of the tender, and it was at the advice of its legal adviser that the Board refunded the deposit. —Ed. W.P.]