PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 90, Issue 14048, 29 April 1919, Page 2

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents, whose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility. THE HOLIDAY QUESTION. (To the Editor.) Sir, —The bait-holiday on Saturday seems to be a sore r.omt to the shopkeeper. One would almost, think tliat if ine shope closed on Saturday tlie general puulio wouid stop eating and wearing ciotnes— in fact, it is enough to draw tears when one considers the ruin it will bring. According to vour leader in Saturday's paper, Hamilton and Cambridge have tried the Saturday half-holiday some years ago, but the experience was so disastrous that the midweek had to be again resorted to. If such is the case, the shop-keepers are like the Tory Government— they do not want to run anything under State control, and it they are forced to, they run it at a loss to try and prove it is a failure. The same thing applies to all traa.espeonle as soon as you talk about the 7rivc-and-take policy. As for Hamilton doing less business, you have only got to look at Christehurch, Wellington, and Auckland, with their suburbs, and small storekeepers that can compete with them, and still the people come into the city on Friday night. As for the farmers, they are always in town on sale day (Thursday) I do not think there .will he much hardship to the general public when they, have five and a-half days in which to buy their goods. As for the mail order houses getting the trade, I never heard such bluff before. How many people would bother to write to Auckland for goods if they can get them in their own town, either by mail or otherwise? I do not care myself—any dnv in the week will suit me—but the shop assistants no doubt would ike the day the sports are held, and a rrmk and no plnv makes Jack a dull Hov " The shop-keeper wants the person with a little life in him who can serve the public with a smile. Hut that does not appeal to some employers ; their main object is businessbusiness; never mind the man behind tbe gun, who is doing all the work — when he is worn out get another. Let us hope that the greed for capital will die out, and that people will consider humanitv a little more, and try rid create sport and emoyment. Jf the phop-keepers in Hamilton want to «ee Hamilton go ahead, let the 95 per cent of business people who oppose Saturday half-holiday get themselves together and consider what is the cause of hundreds of people Irving Hamilton, and they will find, it will nay them better to look into the housing question and mahtf room' for people, instead of trying to drive more away. - 1 am ' eta; E. WATSON. (To the Editor.) Sir,—ln reply to '? Mother of a Family," I beg to say that many shop assistants work from daylight to dark; some live miles away from their place of employment, and have to walk or ride to work and home again after 6 o'clock on four nights in the week, and after 9 o'clock on Saturday night. I have lived in the country many years, milking and trudging on the farm, and reared seven children, but I refute the assertion that Saturday is the country peop'e's day. Wednesday and Thursday being sale days 90" per cent, of farmers' wives make these their shopping day. Its needless to say more, as the townspepople are not so easily gulled on this matter. —I am, etc., ANOTHER. MOTHER OF A FAMILY. Hamilton, April 26, 1919. MR LAFFERTY'S REVIEW. (To the Editor.) Sir,—ln your issue of Friday last there appears a report of what is supposed to be a two years' review by Cr Lafferty of municipal affairs, but there is such a jumble of figures that it is a puzzle to know when he is referring to both years or to the first or second year only. For example, it is not clear whether his figures for street expenditure refer to the first or second year. Had he given the figures for both years, the position would show that, compared with the two years' estimates, East Hamilton has shortspent £205, Claudelands ha.s shortspent £4O, Frankton has over-spent £l3B, and West Hamilton has overspent £669. In 1918-19 a separate, item was made of London and Main streets, and this has been over-spent by £6l. Included in the West Hamilton figures is an amount of £BOO (I understand from the Town Clerk that this information was supplied to Cr Lafferty when other figures were supplied *to him last week), which through the year has been charged against tar-shed and sewerage drainage, the tar-shed expenditure largely being for items that will benefit streets in all parts of the borough, and also for making stock, such as concrete blocks, etc., which may be used in any street —as a matter of fact, during this month a considerable quantity of these manufactured blocks have been used on East Hamilton streets, although the cost of them appears m the last year's figures under the heading of West Hamilton. Seeing that Cr' Lafferty has been a member of the Council for two years, he should know that his reported statement that the supervisor "took office just at the end, when the estimated expenditure was nearly exceeded," is absolutely untrue. The supervisor was appointed in May, 1918, and commenced his duties early in that month (the second month in the last financial year). This is an illustration of the unreliability of the statements made bv Cr Lafferty. One fs at a loss to understand what Cr Laffertv means by the word "notified" in his reference to an increase in the Town Clerk's salary, although the implication appears to be that some "juggle" was done. Why did not he say definitely, as he must know, that this increase was made after the year's estimates had been framed, and that the readjustment of duties and responsibilities resulted in the salary paid to the Engineer being reduced from £450 to £240 per annum, giving a nett saving, as far as these two officers were concerned, at the rate of £l6O per annum? Cr Lafferty's statement that tho Gasworks Department would show an amount of £1307 on the wrong side at tho erd of the year is also untrue. The figures supplied to me (and these are the same figures as supplied to Cr Lafferty) show a surplus on the two years' working, and this surplus is increased by adjustments to be made between the Gas and Electricity Departments. Why did he not_ make more reference to the Electricity Department, which, with receipts amounting to £5624 during last year, has gone to the bad to the tune of over £llOO, and in previous years to the amount of £2575, this being apart from advances made from the genera' account and since repaid out of loan moneys? There is no question that the ooli<rv of the last Council in continuing to run the Electrical Department in the same manner as w-as done by the Frankton Council must be revised by the new Council, which will no doubt find it quite necessary for this year, at any rate, to collect the special interest rates.

Or Lattery concludes his speech (consisting largely of mis-statements and •wrong deductions) by claiming that he

obtained from tbe Municipal Association's solicitor an oj>inion on his rights to inspect the Council's records. "What he dkt was to take a copy of a letter received by the Town Clerk, and make use of it beforo the Council had an opportunity of dealing with it. Such want of etiquette is evidently Cr Lafferty's idea of a Councillor's honour and of the dignity attaching to his position.—l am, otc, JAS. E. TIDD. HAMILTON'S NEEDS.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —In your sub-loader of the 23rd on the Hamilton Citizens' Association's programme, you convey the impression that the scheme f# one for immediate prosecution. This is hardly fair, as its very scope shows that it is one to be dealt with as means and opportunity permit. Hamilton needs a lot of prodding before it will accept even an obvious and imperative improvement. Drainage and pure water are a far cheaper investment than spending money in fighting, say, an epidemic o*' typhoid, for which Claudelands itself is ripening with its drainage-soake'' soil, not to mention other .spots with their accompanying odours. Gocx 1 . streets are eminently desirable, but sanitation and water are an urgent necessity.—l am, etc., EDWIN J. FAIRBTJRN, Taniwha, April 26, 1919. AFFORESTATION. (To the Editor.) Sir, —I was very pleased to read your article on fforestation on April 10, but do you not think that the Government are to blame for tho high cost of building by allowing so much of our timber to bo exploited. When I settled in Raglan fifty years ago tho ruling price for all heart good timber, hand sawn, was 10s a hundred, and millions of feet since rhen have been fallen and burnt to make room for grass. The three trees you mention, viz., p ; ne, poplar and eucalypti, are all good and quick growing; but what beats all I have tried for general purposes is the evergreen oak. I enclose you a sample of tho wood, not twenty years from the acorn, and when cut down was suitable for posts and rails or sawn for, building purposes, and the smallest branches the best of firewood. Walnuts and olives I would also recommend for their fruit. Totara and purir ; will grow far faster than the catalpa that the Government made such a fuss about many years ago.—l am, etc., T. B. HILL. Raglan, April 24, 1919. ANZAC DAY. (To the Editor.) Sir.—lt has occurred to me that possibly my previous letter hereon may convey an erroneous impression to some of your readers. The Mayor (Mr Fow) has always assisted the returned soldiers in every possible manner, and it was not my intention to belittle these services in any way. Being jealous of the honour and. recognition of the day as every soldier desires it should be I desired to point out that the businesses had been asked to close for two hours only, and wrote vou accordingly I trust this explanation will remove any false impression that may have been made.— I am, etc.. N. A. OHING. i Secretary, Waikato RJ3.A.