PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20464, 2 April 1938, Page 9

PUBLIC OPINION

As expressed by correspondents, whose letters are welcome, but for whose views we have no responsibility. Correspondents are requested to write in ink. It is essential that anonymous writers enclose their proper names as a guarantee of good faith. Unless this rule is complied with, their letters will not appear.

NATIONAL INCOME (To the Editor) Sir. —This talk about “national income” appears to be about • something that cannot he measured, and even If the total amount could be ascertained (which is impossible) nothing would be gained, for the result would vary as the amount of production and the money received for it varied. Consequently the value of our total production is the only sound basis of comparison between the national income at various periods. As for an imaginary national income estimated at an amount suitable for particular political | propaganda, it is absolutely valueless from an economic point of view. Three or four years ago I tried to find out the “national income” as represented by the Labour Party, and after much fruitless research referred the matter to one of the Dominion’s chief economic authorities, who told me that it was impossible to compute the full amount of the national income, including all internal transactions, wholesale and retail, and that the result would he no more valuable for purposes of comparison than the production figures. The following example appears to me to state the Labour case graphically: In a certain family there are four adult members whose combined annual income is £BOO. At night the members of the family play poker, and during the year £BOO changes hands among them; therefore the annual income of the family is £IGOO. The figures regarding taxation quoted by Mr J. A. Lee, M.P., at Frankton last week are erroneous, and his percentages inaccurate. Not long ago I drew up a table of taxation during and since the slump years, showing the percentage of the total production absorbed each year in taxation. In 1929 ;our best year) taxation was 14.2 per cent, of production, during the slump about 18 per cent. In 1936-37 about 22 per cent., and this year (1938-39) it will be somewhere between 25 and 28 per cent., and, if unemployment payments are Included, about 30 per- cent. My figures were taken from official publications and were based on absolute facts, not on imagination. Unfortunately my table is unavailable at present, but as soon as I get hold of it again I shall publish it, if the editor permits.—l am, etc., A. WARBURTON. Ngaruawahla, March 29. MUNICIPAL ELECTIONS (To the Editor) Sir,—Your correspondent “Change the Guard” seems much perturbed because I advocated in your columns the necessity for the citizens of Hamilton to get together to combat the attempt on the part of local Labour Parly supporters to introduce party politics into municipal affairs by the selection of a “ticket” for the approaching elections. “Change the Guard” states that this is an insult to 75 per cent, or 80 per cent, of the electors (evidently a modest estimate of the support” he considers his party expects), but there can be no insult or Intended insult In suggesting that his party should not be allowed to have all its own way. The letter that he has written is so antagonistic that it lends weight to the contention that it is not only undesirable that party politics be kept out of municipal affairs, but also that bitterness of which his letter is a sample. When writing I was unaware that the Citizens’ Association suggested was already in process of being formed. Had T known it I need not have written, and this would have saved me the trouble of replying to what was an unreasonable and unnecessarily bitter letter.—-I am. etc., ON GUARD. Hamilton. March 31 (To the Editor) - Sir,—The action of the Labour Party in nominating a “ticket” for the Borough Council and the subsequent suggestion that a Citizens’ Association should be formed for the purpose of ensuring that a council is put into office that will represent all sections of the people has been watched with interest by the writer and many others. The letter by “Change the Guard” in your yesterday’s Issue deals with the question from the Labour Party point of view, and the writer waxed Indignant because it has been suggested that a citizens’ organisation should be formed. “Change the Guard’s ” letter, however, is an expression of opinion is interesting, and I should like to have this opportunity of dealing with some of his statements. The fact that the Labour Government has been entrusted with the government of the Dominion at the present time is no reason why it should be entrusted with the government of ibis town. Political questions differ vastly from local questions, and the party machine is seen at its very worst when controlling a borough. He then refers to the “star chamber methods” employed by the present council, but here again lie is at fault,/because he does not know whom the individuals are that a citizens’ Association would endorse. He prophesies a smashing victory for his parly in the borough elections in May, but this is purely conjecture on his part, and is in any case an additional reason why others should unite. His final point, however, is pure effrontery. On what grounds does he assume that “the devoted army of limitless millions of art and craftsmen. engineers, skilled mechanics, and workmen of every type” desire to be represented by official Labour? No. Sir, I think that experience proves that the best service comes from men who represent all sections of the community and men of true Labour thought have served, along with others, in Hie fellowship of service In the past.—l am, etc.. CITIZEN. Hamilton. March 31.

AGRICULTURAL MUSEUM (To the Editor) Sir,-—Mr Gilbert Archey’s suggestion. made at at the meeting of the Hamilton Rotary Club last Monday, should arouse much interest throughout the Waikato, and possibly even further afield. Tt is Indeed fitting that New Zealand should possess an agricultural museum, and what more suitable location for such an institution than Hamilton? New Zealand’s dependance upon the products of the land, and the Waikato’s great contribution thereto, are surely sufficient Justification for the establishment, at Hamilton of an institution that would at once pay tribute to the pioneers of our great industry and record in a tangible way the rapid progress that this industry has made. Certain phases of agriculture are in danger of becoming as extinct as the moa, and yet the extinct moa commands more public attention. It will not be many years before the original bush covering will be only a memory, but it is a memory that should be preserved for the education of future generations. The story of the breaking in of any virgin land is always a fascinating one, and such stories should be preserved in concrete form. Agriculture is a many-sided industry, and if each of its many sides is to receive such consideration as a museum could give it, then considerable space would be required. I know of no more likely place to house such a project than another Bledisloe Hall on the land owned by the Waikato Winter Show Association. Another such hall as the Bledisloe Hall of Agriculture, with a good, wide balcony round its four sides, would provide much-needed additional show space on the ground floor and ample museum space on the balcony. A more centrally-situated and accessible location than the Winter Show Hall would be hard to find, and there would be the added advantage that a museum there would be permanently housed in suitable surroundj ings and be under the direct super- • vision of an association that has already proved to be of immense value to the Dominion's most important industry. During the seven or eight days of the Winter Show somewhere between 75,000 and 100,000 people pass through it, and few, if any, would miss the museum gallery if it formed part of the show attractions. Housed away from such an advantageous setting, the museum would not attract as many visitors in ton years and it could not help becoming somewhat fossilised itself. In the more attractive atmosphere of the Winter Show hall' a museum would bo seen in an altogether different light, and would make a wider appeal. I hope that the many organised bodies in the Waikato and adjacent districts will give the Agricultural Museum project a helping hand and that they will combine to assure for Hamilton the first museum of its kind in the Dominion. I would particularly commend the schema to the executive of the Waikato Winter Show Association, as I feel sure that an early realisation of this excellent scheme will depend, in a large measure, upon their favourable consideration.—l am, etc., W. ALEXANDER, Agricultural Advisor. . i Auckland, March 30. GARDEN PLACE (To the Editor) % Sir.—Last Saturday a report appeared in your paper of a private meeting for the purpose of forming a Citizens’ Association. This report was. unfortunately, incorrect in some material respects. It stated, firstly, that representatives of the Garden j Place Preservation Society were present; and. secondly, that the meeting unanimously agreed that the Garden Place issue should be “submerged.” The first statement has been corrected by a paragraph in a subsequent issue of your paper, stating that some members of the society were present, but in a private capacity only. In regard to the second point, however, I wish to say that, being a member of the society and having been present at the meeting, I did not. and cannot, agree that the Garden Place issue should be submerged, and I am not aware that such an issue was put to the meeting—even apart, from any question of a unanimous expression of opinion. I may add, T am not aware that any other supporters of the retention of the hill who were present held the views thus attributed to them. The publication, however, of a report of this nature, apart from being embarrassing to some of those attending the meeting, necessarily brings into the field of public discussion the general matters dealt, with by the meeting. In this connection 1 may say that I was invited to attend the meeting on tho understanding that certain proposals would be put forward, designed to reconcile differences between the council and the Preservation Society over Garden Place Hill. The trend of majority opinion at the meeting was certainly (as indicated in your report) that the hill issue should be “submerged” in view of the nomination of a Labour ticket for the council. It also appeared to me that the meeting consisted principally of gentlemen whose views would be in favour of the removal of the hill, and, having regard to the present keen public interest taken in the matter, I did not feel surprised that they should wish the question to be dropped for the time being. The fact that the question of the hill is likely to be the dominant issue at the forthcoming elections is one for which the Hamilton Borough Council is entirely responsible. In no real sense whatever could it honestly be said that the fate of the hill was an issue before the electors at the last municipal elections. The policy of the Preservation Society has been to ensure. firstly, that all aspects of the matter should he thoroughly and publicly examined: and, secondly, that the electors of Hamilton should have a full opportunity of expressing their views in the form of a mandate to the incoming council. Once these conditions have been satisfied I think that, the members of the Preservation Society are. as such, no longer interested in the matter. In view, however, of Hie fact that no issue in Hamilton has ever had a more detailed and public

thrashing:, and in view of the fair presumption that the citizens present at the meeting: exercised their votes on the (harden Place issue last April, it is remarkable that the meeting - should suggest that the hill question he referred to the incoming Borough Council "for full investigation.”—l am. etc.. DOUdLAS SEYMOEIt. Hamilon, March 30