PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 122, Issue 20465, 4 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. Jt 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.

PRIMARY PRODUCER’S POSITION (To the Editor) Sir, —I note that a visiting- farmer from Australia says that they are keenly interested in the results that are likely to come about in our dairyindustry as a result of the Labour Government’s action in raising wages and establishing a forty-hour week In the cities while expecting the farmers to carry on with labour at a lower figure per hour , and a sixty-odd-hour \veek. Of course they are interested, as it means a definite reduction of output from New Zealand, with which in the past they have had to compete. It is certainly refreshing to read of the contemplated action by a section of the Post and Telegraph Department employees in voluntarily subscribing £IOOO towards the Labour Party's funds. No doubt tihs appeals to them as a sound investment. If the Government can.succeed in suggesting to others to do likewise, and also increase the number of civil servants by the inauguration of steel works and similar concerns, they will eventually be able to have the primary producers where they want them —namely, under serfdom, that being their ideal, the producer and the consumer to have equal rights in the distribution of what is produced solely by the industry of the producer. Unless the primary producers all combine they will constitute the under dog of the future.—l am, etc., BED ROCK. Hamilton, March 31 THE DEFENCE QUESTION (To the Editor) Sir.—Your issue of to-day contains two letters bearing strongly on the defence question, and it may be seriously noted that the two writers, while expressing fundamentally opposing and conflicting views in regard to the question, are both apparently sincere and confident that their respective sentiments are fully realistic. Further, it will be noted that each writer argues and comments in a manner fitting and appropriate to the approach made to the question. But in this instance the difference of approach is not simply a splitting of hairs, but can only be accounted for by a deeplying difference of spirit and outlook, which makes possible little in common between the two. Here 1 will say that I find myself strongly responsive to and in accord with the vein of Mr J. G. Morris, but not so with that of “Ex-Soldier,” except that I can understand and appreciate what from his approach must seem to be the rightness and urgency of his plea. This plea is the traditional reaction, true to type, in the face of a situation which appears to menace the stronghold of monopoly and to challenge the assumed rights and accustomed practices of State and individual—in short, a situation which inevitably excites imagination. Now, imagination means openmindedness, keen penetration and creative use of opportunity for the betterment of living beings; but only so long as it is positive, free from fear. Unfortunately this is a condition which cannot be arrived at by the many, and the whole sad story of armaments and war-preparedness Is simply the evil genius of fear-ridden Imagination, and in this we have the certainty of man’s undoing. Fear, be it noted, arises from incomplete comprehension, lack of understanding, uncertainty. It intensifies the spirit of separateness which prevents understanding, and kills fellow-feeling, goodwill. It expresses itself in action designed for defence, which is but little removed from aggression, and sooner or later becomes aggression as well as defence. With the mind fearridden there cannot be true discernment, but only the opposite of fear.— that is, courage, forceful heroism—and this is the great destroyer, because it is blind, recognising only a fixed ideal, which must be achieved at all costs. Alas for man in this condition! In fighting the awful enemy, as he believes, he is but letting loose powers of oppression and tyranny which, all unseen by him, are but utilising the diversion to take a firmer hold of him. Man goes to war to escape oppression at home—an oppression which he does not understand or even really recognise, it being too involved with the nature of his own life. Any action seems better than none—life demands action, and the terrific action of war relieves pent-up feeling for the time being and makes hardship more endurable. It is like liquor to the craving man. who cares not that by relieving his “thirst” he is adding to the strength of his enemy, the craving. Still there is no shutting one’s eyes to the fact that this absurd process is very nearly the common lot of man and is practically the only life known by the vast majority of us. There is no use shrinking from it; it is an inescapable reality until it is understood fully, and one must act before one can understand. Faced with actual crisis, it will be found that few can unconditionally take their stand with Mr Morris. If the spirit of possession and defence is inherent in every motive of life, one must be realistic, honest, when faced with crisis. Pacifism is almost always hypocrisy, sheer pretence, since in the last, resort the professing pacifist relies upon brute force to protect his position— one's brute force, if not his own ! May I conclude by quoting a passage from a letter I wrote to the Prime Minister, Mr M. J. Savage, and dated May 10, 1930? It reads — “You must be aware that the present is a most critical though opportune time as regards dealing with tlm question of defence. Whichever policy is to be carried through (whether it be of defence or free entry l it must be. as you have recognised in other i matters, thorough-going, to be anything but a humbug; and it is obvious j that if New Zealand is going to stick to j the old idea of defence and to go on with it as though she really meant it. then it must be good-bye to better times and greater freedom. If. on the other hand, you are going to stand bv a policy of free entry 1o New Zealand, which must mean scrapping the provocation and expense of defence measures . • • you are to have perhaps the greatest of all tasks to | carry the people with you." However, the Government cannot be said to be facing the issue —J am etc.. W. E. HANSEN. j Orini, March 30. •

CRICKET (To the Editor) Sir, —As a visitor and one who has seen all the world’s best players for the past thirty years, might 1 offer a few comments on the match played last week between Hamilton and Wanganui ? •The exhibition by some of our batsmen was an eye-opener, and I never Imagined that a village of the size of Hamilton could stage such batting as that provided by Clough, Everest and McKenzie. The last-named is an artist, and reminded me a lot of the famous Englishman Palairet. There were other tine players in your team, and without hesitation I would say that you have a very fine side, and one of which any town in England would be proud. The small crowd present seemed to enjoy the cricket, but 1 thought it a pity that your townspeople were not there in force to witness such able batting. I would suggest that parents and children who have any love for cricket should inquire if any further Hawke Cup matches are to he played in Hamilton, and, if so. to make a point of attending.—l am, etc., LANCASTRIAN. Hamilton, March 30. FALLACIOUS REASONING (To the Editor) Sir. —Two letters in your issue of Tuesday drew my attention as being rather absurd deductions. Mr Young suggests that taxation for social benefits destroys individual initiative and national welfare. How does he know? On what grounds does he base his assertion There Is a lot of this sort of propaganda going round, and not one of those asserting it can prove or have had actual experience ( of the evil effects of his assertion. It is simply a political parrot cry put up by interests opposed to Labour’s ideals. I would also like to ask Mr ’ Young how he, or any other Douglas- ’ ite, is going to prevent accumulation of credits unless by taxation? To issue unlimited money or credits without having some means of keeping jt circulating in and out of the Treasury \ beats me. “Statistics,” like all other orthodox thinkers, seems to think that we must | export to live. It is a mistaken assumption, however. If those claiming this theory would follow', say, £IOO (New Zealand) worth of butter ’ to Britain and back they will find that 1 what was sold for £IOO in our money ' exchange goods would take about £l6O (New' Zealand) money to buy, ; or, on the other hand, w r e lose about two-thirds of what we send away. “Statistics” can work it out for him- ’ self and perhaps convince himself that the more we export the poorer we ’ get, and Mr J. A. Lee’s assertion that we could have avoided a slump in New . Zealand is quite sound. One has to , admit that we were not so well In- _ formed on money-juggling then as we are to-day (thanks to Mr Editor in ’ permitting continuance of discussion on this subject), and I assert that we I can avoid depression just as easily as we can control prices—as instance wheat growing, and as vested interests ' ' control prices and dividends. Labour came into power on the avowed declaration to better the con- | ditions of those depressed by the Rei form Government, and is doing it. All honour to Mr Savage and his gallant band of real reformers. Under their | guidance New Zealand will go on to , still better conditions.—l am, etc., C. J. TUCK. Rotorua, March 31. CHEAPER POWER (To the Editor) Sir, —I offer no apology for bringing ’ under your notice some essential factors relative to cheaper power in ito relation to industry. An investigation carried out by tht technical staff of a manufacturing firm, and endorsed by a firm of New Zealand engineers, showed that although industry was being supplied at the favourable rate of |d per unit, plus a k.v.a. charge of £4 per unit of maximum demand, the resultant saving made by oil engine is sufficient to pay for the complete installation of the latter within three years. With the present charges for bulk supply, to which must be added the Power Board's reticulation costs, there is not . much left to be added to the credit of j the electricity account; and if the experience of the Christchurch Corporation recently in its new' agreement with the Public Works Department, reflecting an increase averaging 30 per cent., becomes general, what position does this class of power occupy in a competitive sense for many classes of loading? It would appear that only by unwarrantable restrictions imposed on industry pan it remain in the field as a competitor. In the light of recent technical developments a definite responsibility rests on those who are entrusted with the expenditure of the ratepayers’ money for various projects fully to investigate these essential problems. Does that always obtain? Is the province of the qualified engineer recognised in .’relation thereto? The statement of the Auckland Hospital Board, j expressing satisfaction that by having its laundry work done outside the institution it will save £3OOO per J annum, is a tacit admission of the low j thermal efficiency of the board's equipment on the engineering side. This sum judiciously expended would go % long way in meeting the hoard’s total commitments for light, heat, and power. How can we hope for results credit- . able to the engineer when the purely technical problems involved are subject to domination by board members? Take the hospitals section of the Health Department throughout New Zealand: its eyes are definitely closed to the advantages to be obtained from j the combination of the supply of [electricity with that of steam heat in relation to the conduct of hospital j routine work. Allowing a reinunera- ; live figure ol' 22d per fflOOlb as an example of what would lie the price for the supply of steam heat, a supply of electricity would thus he made available at the low cost of .25d per unit, allowing a ratio of steam to electricity of 30 to 1. We have an Industrial Efficiency Act. and yet find those Departments under ministerial control are the worst offenders against the principles laid down, together with the milk-pro-cessing plants in connection with New Zealand's primary industry.—l am, etc., K.V.A. 1 Cambridge, March 31,