Public Opinion

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 76, Issue 285, 2 December 1933, Page 8

Public Opinion

“TO CITY COUNCILLORS”

«sii, — L regret exceedingly that your correspondent “Ratepayer,” in his letter in your issue of to-day, should have missed the obvious and most vital point in “Business Girl’s” unfortunately justified complaint concerning the distressing lack of public conveniences in this city, more particularly for women. ‘ ‘ Ratepayer’s ’ ’ comments and efforts tc excuse the City Councillorj are paltry and puerile, as it matter.? little in the real point at issue as to whether the Railway Department brought the visitors here, or whether they auived by other means of transpoit, ana 1 fee. sorry foi him in his failu.e to appreciate the courageous letter writ, t».'u by out recent visitor who ha.turned the spotlight upon matters demamling ca.ly remedy. One wonder: what the Ladies’ lb st w:.s ever erected for if not, to meet the needs of visitors to our city on. Sundays and holidays, or “pleasuring days,” and it is regrettable indeed that a lamentable lack of courtesy upon the part of the custodian should have compelled “Business Girl” to give voice to a complaint that is unquestionably warranted. The failure of the custodian to appreciate the fitness of things is just one more instance of “man’s inhumanity to man,” and it is perhaps unfortunate that the Divine Creator did not differentiate between working days and “pleasuring days” when creating man and woman with their complex internal organs and their corresponding daily needs if bodily health and personal comfort are to be decently observed. However, I sincerely trust that “Business Girl’s” commendable letter will bring forth the desired result by | prompting our Alayor and Councillors to provide the requisite facilities and conveniences and so free our city from the stigma of lack of hospitality and consideration for the needs of the travelling public. Yours, etc. “PROH Puf)Oß.” Wanganui, December 1, 1933. Sir, —Your correspondent “Kate payer,” in this morning’s “Chronicle,” resents the implication that Wanganui is inhospitable. What else could “Business Girl” think when she was so insulted by an employee of the City Council? As she stated, I think their by-laws want revising. There are no conveniences open for women on ho! days and Sundays, when in my opinionthey are most needed. Wanganui rp*os itself as a city and should cater for visitors’ needs on holidays and Sundays. I myself live in the country, and having been in the city on a holiday, it was not a Sunday, had practically the same treatment meted out to me by the same employee. Courtesy costs nothing and even if it was against her principles to stretch a point in such a case as the New Plymouth girls, there was no need to go out of her way to lecture the girls. Can anyone be surprised at their anger? Fancy anyone saying we did not ask you to come, so you can look after yourself. I suppose these visitors bring revenue to the council by the way of tram fares. Why not give the train employees a holiday and let the visitors walk or hire their own conveyance? —Yours faithfully, December 1, 1933. * I COUNTR YWOAf A N. ’ ’