PUBLIC OPINION.

Waikato Times, Volume 110, Issue 18407, 14 August 1931, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION.

As expressed by correspondents, i wnose letters are welcome, but for i whose views we have no responslbility. Correspondents must write | in ink. I THE POLITICAL ISSUE. (To the Editor.) Sir. —It is evident that the general : election is to be fought out with three j parties in the field. Mr Forbes and j his colleagues have appealed in vain , to Reform and Labour to form a Nat- • ional Government, as they declare that i at present it is essential to place ' country before party interests. There ! is no doubt as to Hie gravity of the • position, but apparently our politicians are unable to grasp that financial , conditions were never more serious, | and that the country has a right to : demand the best services from all Its public men in solving the problems with which it is confronted. One does not expect much from Labour: the members of that party are so imbued with class that they are unable to see any other aspect, but better things were expected from, the Reformers who are prone to boast that they arc nothing if not patriotic. However, they have scornfully rejected all overtures from the Government to sink party interests for the nonce and join in a concentrated effort to save the country. They prefer to paddle their own canoe evidently under the belief that they will emerge from the general election with a majority. JI, is never safe Io prophesy, but Reformers would he wise to consider tho possibility, and even Hie probability, that tills will not be the case. Last election was not so much a decision in favour of the United Party as a decision against the Reform Party; nor is it at all clear that this frame of mind has disappeared. The Reform Party still suffer from the policy they pursued during their long tenure of power. They selected for candidates men who could be relied on to vote for the party, but could be relied on for little more. They have received one or two very emphatic declarations from the electors—notably in Raglan—that the Reform label has lost its pull, and that Hie general body of electors will no longer consent to accept a candidate because lie dons blue. If I can rend the signs of the times —and I flatter myself I can—the coming elections will he an election in which the personality of the candidate will weigh more with the electors than the col-

our of his uniform, and if party has to be taken into consideration, Hie Jure to United will be greater than to Reform. Mr Forbes and his colleagues have indicated most plainly that they do not lay much stress on party, and, for that reason they arc honoured. I shall be much surprised when the final figures are hoisted, if it is not found that the United Party tias emerged from the polls with substantial accretion in strength and Reform stock showing a corresponding decline.—l am, etc., DIDYMUS. Matangi, August 12, 1931. NO CHILDREN. (To the Editor.) STr, —I am a married man with a young family and am looking for farm . work. I have been doing farm work I for the past 12 years, and can do any- I thing there is to be done on the land. I I have references for three and two and a-half years, but everywhere 1 | apply for. work It is the same old I cry:—"Have you any children. We! don't want anyone with children.” I ' have applied for three married men's j jobs to-day but I have got three■ children. What am I going to do with them? I have been working on I Government subsidy schemes, but now ' the 4A scheme is finished. Is It not I time the Government got out a land settlement scheme, even if it is only ; I 30-acre farms, so that a man can gel • two good meals a day and a roof for i his wife and children? I applied to • the Crown Lands Department a while back for a farm. I could have made it a paying concern if it had been allotted to me. But no; they sent me a reply to the effect that after going into the position, it was decided my application should be declined. If Hie Gov- ; ernment had advanced me the money that they paid me on the 4A scheme j at interest instead of helping a man ' with 1000 acres and a business in town , that money would have set me going i on a 30-acre farm; but now I cannot • get a farm position because I have i children. I wonder how some of Hie I farmers would fuel tramping the ; 1 streets in search of work, and barred | because they have children. Now 1 will have to accept charity and go on relief work. —1 am, etc., DISGUSTED. Hamilton, August 13, 1931. □’ACCUSE. (To the Editor.) Sir, —Tlie scheme supported by the | chairman of the Borough Council works committee for the removal of Garden Place hill stands condemned out of his own mouth. Every attempt at critical argument brought against your leading article on tlie subject has in effect supported the views expressed therein. The contentions advanced by Hie writer of the attack have merely rebounded upon himself ana forcibly Illustrated the weakness of his defence. The article in short, gives conclusive reasons and evidence of why the hill should not be removed. | It shows as well that although the > preparation of a new report was not i sanctioned by the council, the proI posal had been already prepared, at least in its superficialities. It proves too that town planning by experts is overdue in Hamilton. The explanation proffered under Mr Bourne’s name might well be headed "J’Accuse. ’ — I am, etc., ONLOOKER. GARDEN PLACE. (To tho Editor.) Sir,- -Tlie chairman of the works | committee of Hie Hamilton Borough Council strongly advocates Hie adop- ; lion of Hie scheme tor the removal of j the Garden Place hill. In a column and j a-half of specious argument he endeavI ours to show that the opponents to the ■ measure if they are not fools, arc igj nor.rnt and are unable to recognise the I advantages of the p.an which he, some ! members of his committee, and some | borough officials desire to foist upon j'lie residents. The plan certainly would ha\c two results it would provide desItrnetive work for Hie unemployed for i a long period and also a big sink tor i municipal money. it seems to me | somewhat strange that it should be I net’<?ssary for tlie works eomniillee Io I seek permission Io procure a report on i the subject seeing that Hie eliairmaii I is. apparently, so well supplied with ' infornialion as Io the nature that report would be. 1 am. cle.. SIAM. j Hamilton, August 12, 1931.

ECONOMIC POSITION. (To the Editor.) Sir, —My attention has been drawn to a letter by "01. l Liberal," which appeared in your paper about a week ago, and 1 now write to state that the author of it is in error if he gathers from my remarks, that I placed on the shoulders of the present Government the full responsibility for the parlous slate in which New Zealand—in com mon with many other countries —now finds herself. That would have been ridiculous. What I did allege was that Hie Government "did not realise the seriousness of the position early enough and \Chen it lid, the measures taken wore hopelessly inadequate,” which obviously discloses ignorance or in- . ptitude on its part.- I am, etc., WALTER SEAVILL. Hamilton, August 13, IU3I.