PUBLIC OPINION

Waikato Times, Volume 123, Issue 20626, 12 October 1938, Page 11

PUBLIC OPINION

i expressed by correspondents, whose letters are welcome, but for who'.*e we have no responsibility. Correspondents are requested 1 to write in ink. It is essential that anonymous writers enclose their proper name® 83 a guarantee of good faith. Unless this rule Is complied with, their letters will not appear.

NOTICE TO CORRESPONDENTS

?o great has been the volume of letters for the ‘‘Public Opinion” columns that it has been impossible to publish all. Letters containing pure propaganda also have not been published. Letters of a 'political nature will not he published on Friday or Saturday, as they would be too near to election day lo permit of replies. Regret is expressed that it has not bpen possible to publish many interesting contributions.—Ed. W.T.

WORKERS AT ELECTION

(To the Editor) ► Sir, —I hear that large numbers of rivil servants are to be employed on Saturday ns returning officers for the elections, thus displacing many of tho men who depend on these casual opportunities of making a little to supplement their pensions, etc. The Government- professes to be out to help the underdog and poorer people. This does not look much like it. —1 am. etc., RETURNED SOLDIER. Hamilton, October 11.

PROTEST AGAINST ATTACK

(To the Editor) Sir,—l have not the pleasure of personal acquaintance with Mr de la Mare, but I feel that a protest should be raised when a rnan is subjected to such a cowardly stab in the back as that which appeared in a letter over the nom-de-plume of “Common Sense.”’ If the point of the attack is Mr de la Mare's sincerity, patriotism or knowledge of affairs it is well known that he has earned the right to speak. I would agree With “Common Sense” that there are often two sides to a question, but- there are no two sides to right or wrong. I would suggest to “Common Sense” that it would be wisdom on h!s part if he desires the respect of others or desires to preserve what smalt amount of selfrespect he has left that lie take wliat steps he can to prevent his identity from becoming known to his friends. As people of this type would no doubt attribute any word of protest over a nom-de-plume to be the work f Mr de la Mare himself 1 have no option but to sign my name.—l am, etc., ED. CHAS. lIOUCIIEX. Hamilton, October 11.

PROMPT ACTION

(To the Editor) Sir.—During my last visit to the South Island I called upon a farmer whom I have known for more than 50 years. We naturally talked about how he was getting on. and went over the farm, which I had known in the rough. He told me of how he had financed the purchase of 200 sheep for some land he had put in pasture the year before. He had always dealt with one particular stock firm", which held monthly sales in the district. On the morning of the sale he called on the local manager of the company, who came to the district on sale days, and told him ho wanted finance to buy 200 or 300 sheep, and was prepared to sign any required document. Said the manager: “Sign be hanged! You’ve been a good client of ours for years. Go and buy all the sheep you want.” That fixed everything. Can anyone imagine a deal like that in a nationalised stock agency? —I am, etc., A. WARBURTON. Ngaruawahia. October 8.

ELECTION BROADCASTS

(To the Editor) Sir, —“Not Misled” criticises Mr Bodkin's broadcast speech and gives examples to prove that he was untruthful. May I test these examples? (1) “He provoked his opponents with Socialism.” Why did this anger these opponents when the leaders of their party, Messrs Savage. Lee, Webb, Armstrong and others, openly admit that they are out to establish social - ism in New Zealand?

(2) “He stirred up class dissension.” This is a ‘beauty,” considering that the speakers for the Labour Party always appeal to class feeling and have for years preached class consciousness. (3) “Not Misled” says the party Mr Bodkin represents opposed Seddon. Great Scott! Forbes, Ward. Hall Jones, etc., were strong Seddonites! (4) Mr Bodkin was not incorrect when he pointed out that young girls had to contribute to the social security fund. If they are at home and not receiving wages they pay ss; if they are away from home receiving wages they will pay Is in the £1 plus Is 3d for the value of their keep. Mr Bodkin was absolutely correct. (5) Not only the civil servant i but everyone else pays the is, bcI sides tlie extra 4d. because that is j comes from the Consolidated Fund, { and has to be transferred from our ■ pocket into that fund before it can be ! paid out. | (C) Mr Bodkin is accused of bring- ■ inc- out “tho old catch-cry” of people’s j savings. “Not Misled” says the radio { has cleared this up. If it has, Ihen the radio has humbugged the listeners. The people's savings, large or small, j are in jeopardy, not because we can’t | get them paid to us in money, but be- ! cause the money paid to us is of less ! value and will become still less so. J Mr Nash says that the Government is working on overdraft from the Reserve Bank. He estimates £1.000,000 loss this year on butter; lie admits that tbp overdraft means more cur- ; rency in circulation, based apparently on this loss. In other words, inflation. - Deposits in the savings bank or else- ! where can only be paid in Reserve | Rank notes, which owing to inflation 1 become of less value. Therefore it is i obvious that every £1 we save to-day , will become of less value the longer we bold if. Our savings are then definitely in danger. (7 ) “Not Misled” says the ficht is j not about Socialism, “if they like to i call It that.” We “raii it that,” be- ; cause its leaders have repeatedly fold j us that it is Socialism. If it is not, then they are speaking untruths, not us.—l am. etc., AJAX. j i October 8. ‘

VALUE OF SOCIAL SECURITY

(To the Editor) Sir,—Tt. has been said that the Social Security Act is unnecessary because of the good work being done by the friendly societies. It should be remembered, however, that the members of friendly societies are “picked” men, in the sense that they have to pass a medical test before being admitted. This means that- those most, in need of medical attentiorf are shut nut of the friendly societies. This is quite understandable, and is. indeed, necessary for the financial stability of the societies; but il emphasises the need for such provision as is made by the Social Security Act.—l am. etc., P.. A. DRUID. Hamilton, October 10.

HEALTH INSURANCE SCHEMES

(To the Editor) ?ir, —Mr Grant stated at Frankton Town Ilall that the friendly societies of this country should control any health insurance scheme. He pointed to the work done by friendly societies of Great Britain. Here are some facts: The Amalgamated Society of Woodworkers’ Trade Union in Great Britain administers its own fund in such a capable way that the half-mililon members get 22s a week sickness benefit. The Prudential. Scottish Legal, Pearl and all the other large societies, which have formed a ring, pay 15s a week. The trade union funds are administered by Labour, and the Prudential, etc., by a ring of capitalists.—l am. etc., WOODWORK FR. Frankton, October 11.

FARMERS’ REMUNERATION

Sir, —I quote the. following extract from “Guaranteed Price: Why and How,” by Walter Nash, M.P.: “The payment to the farmer must bo mea.■snred by the same tape as is used to measure the payment to others who render equal service.” How does the Government reconcile Ibis with the facts that a Public Works employee works a five-hour day and gets £1 a day, as stated in Mr Langstone’s pamphlet, whereas the fanner works, say, seven eight-hour days and gets 13s a day, or £4 Jos a week, as allowed in fixing the guaranteed price? This means that the farmer’s job does not. in the eyes of the Labour Party, come up to the same standard as the Public Works job, which is to say that the farmer is the lowest menial worker in New Zealand.—l am, etc., FARMER. Whatawhata. October 10.

STATE HOUSING

(To the Editor) Sir, —I am an occupant of a State house in Hamilton. Yesterday I picked up in my garden a booklet bearing the imprint of the National Party, mainly devoted to predicting the results of another Labour ierm In office; and apart from such trifles as dictatorships, road gangs, confiscations, robbery. bankruptcy, concentration camps, shootings, murders, starvation, exile, shellings, bombings, massacres, taxes, secret police, desolation and despair (seriatim), their forecast was pretty favourable to the other party. Embedded in this plaster of propaganda was the inference that a State tenant could only have “a small house at a heavy rental, where you may not drive a nail or hardly make a garden, pets are forbidden, and there is scarcely room for a child.” J feel it my duty to confess that for the sum of 29s 3d weekly I am renting a fair-sized, comfortable, convenient modern dwelling, for which 37s 6d would be asked and obtained under private enterprise. In addition to this we have: (a) Driven 38 nails, (b) dug up the entire section except for the ground under the house and made a garden, (c) pets, (d) room for quite a large child (and having another this week). In spite of these offences we are Still at liberty, alive, well fed. The only serious complaints to make about the property is. firstly, that we have to pay our rent promptly, and. secondly, the section has been levelled by the contractors with soil from Garden Place Hill. By no stretch of the imagination can one blame the dictatorship for that.—l am. etc.. GOEBBELS. Hamilton, October 8.

RELIEF CONDITIONS

(To the Editor) Sir.—The National Party is crying out that the working people are ruined and that the land Is going lo be taken from the farmer. ITow many believe that? How many hundreds of farmers had to walk off their farms when the Reform Government ruled? They struggled on and asked for help, hut they got no help. The bailiffs were put on their farms or they had lo walk off, losing everything. How many hundreds of single men and married men working for farmers received no pay for their work because the farmer had no money to pay with and were advised by the Reform Government lo stay on with the farmers so that they would have a roof over their heads, and food?

How many thousands of men applied for relief work, but were told they must sell their cars and everything they possessed and live on the money before they would be v allowed any relief work? How many fine men worked on relief till their clothes were threadbare and their shoes in tatters while monied mpn flourished in Parliament. earning a good salary to pile on to their private wealth? How many poor relief men did they help? How many poor widows with a little home only partly paid for suffered distress because the relief workers could not afford to pav the rent regularly for their rooms? But I know of well-to-do people who never passed a helping hand to those gentlemanly relief workers who at one time were their friends. Many farmers .could net afford to pay for a hit of meat. Now they are rolling in money. They have paid off a h.t of mortgage and have bought back the cars they were obliged to part with. —I am, etc., A WORKER. Hamilton, October 10.

ELECTION SPEECHES

(To the Editor) Sir,—Many of those aspiring to parliamentary honours are apt to address their audiences as if they were addressing a number of school children, and then only up to about Standard IV. The explanation of what social security means and the benefits and desirability of insurance and quite a lot of stuff that comes over the air would lead one to think that the average intellect of New Zealanders was of a very low order. If they would stick to definite politics their speeches would carry far more weight than at present they appear to do.— t am, etc., GIVE US POLITICS. Hamilton, October 10

COUNTRY QUOTA

(To the Editor) Sir,—The Hon. Adam Hamilton on September 28 challenged the Prime Minister to give to the farmers an assurance that the country quota would not be altered or interfered with in any way. Mr Savage has not replied, nor have any other Labour candidates or members of the Cabinet when an assurance has been asked for. The reason for the refusal is not hard to seek. Mr Roberts and Mr Wilson, of the Labour Federation, and Mr Savage, according to the Standard, were responsible for the Labour Party’s manifesto. Thus we find that trade union bosses and secretaries of militant unions are wielding their influence. and consequently demand that, they should have a greater political influence by altering the country quota.—l am, etc., N.Z. FARMER. Claudelands, October 9

To the Editor)

Sir, —-The question of the country quota is agitating considerably the minds of rural electors, and justifiably so, by reason of evasive replies from the Prime Minister and his colleagues. However, in a moment of unguarded candour a political genius will spill the beans. During the Manukau byelection campaign, replying to a questioner, Mr Osborne stated that “the Government intends to deal with arid adjust the country quota later”— probably in a manner reminiscent of “fair play, justice, the right to live, and refusal to be a party to their crucifixion” since accorded the “B” stations.—l am, etc., BEWARE. Tuhikaramea Road, October 10.

BUILDING SUBSIDIES

(To the Editor) Sir.—On October 6, at Claudelands, the Labour candidate said: “While thousands of women and children were starving Mr Adam Hamilton was giving grants to large and wealthy companies.” Mr Barrell read a list of those beneficiaries and stated that Mr Hamilton was throwing away these thousands while the poor women and children suffered. Mr Barrell further stated that Mr Hamilton did not deny these factors. The facts of the case do not support the contention of the candidate relative to the supposedly Inhuman action of the present leader of the National Party. The fact is that the money given to the companies came from the ordinary building subsidy in place of the “dole,” Mr Hamilton agreeing with the Labour Party in giving work to the workers instead of a demoralising dole. That Mr Hamilton accepted the challenge of the member for Hamilton is clearly seen from Hansard, page 351. The quotation is as follows: Mr Hamilton: “The honourable gentleman is out of date.” Mr Barrell: “I am not out of date. This sort of thing keeps, and it will be hard to forget.” (Further grants were mentioned by Mr Barrell.) He concluded with: “It made a grant of £4OOO to the Masonic Hotel at Napier.” Mr Hamilton: “It did not.” Mr Barrell: “I have it here before me.” Mr Hamilton: “The honourable gentleman has not.”—l am, etc., THE SENTRY. Hamilton, October 10.

FREEHOLD OR LEASEHOLD?

(To the Editor) Sir, —Mr Langstone states that he has granted several freehold titles, but omits to state that the applicants for these titles are legally entitled to the freehold and that he has not power, without legislation, to withhold it. He has publicly stated that no freehold will be granted for anv land acquired in the future for settlement. No doubt some will remember when Mr Holland was leader of the Labour Party he fought an election on the main policy of usehold, which in other words was the retention of the land by the £tate. letting it on a leasehold basis. On this occasion the usehold policy was soundly defeated, as the freehold is demanded as of right by all liberty-loving British people. The [Time Minister stated recently that he will obtain lands for farmers’ sons and grant them a tenure, but. he purposely refrains from stating the nature of the tenure. Why does he not state that he will grant, whatever tenure is desired? The reason is not. far to find, as the .policy propounded by the parly is undoubtedly, firstly and lastly, the socialisialion. amongst other things, of the land. All mortgages of froelfold to the, Stale Advances Corporation, or other- , wise the State, have all the machinery for complete socialisation contained in them should it he so desired. Among oilier restrictions, the land may not he sold, leased, disposed of or an Agreement entered into for sharemilking or sharecropping without the consent of the corporation, nor may tho mortgage he paid off without Ihe like consent, unless it is paid off with the bonds ol' the corporation, which, I understand, are all owned by the State. You will thus see the State corporation has full power should it care to enforce it. An applicant for more than a twothirds loan to build a home is asked the question whether his circumstances would be met by renting a home from the State. Every person's first objective is to make his farm or his home his freehold or castle, absolutely free from State am, etc., FREEHOLD, Hamilton, October 8.

BUILDING CONTRACTS

(To the Editor) Sir,—lt is reported that it is the intention of the Government to eliminate the competitive system in contracts for buildings, and goods to be privately determined by the Minister. As there are no new species of mankind contracts could be bought. Gould someone tell me if the rumour is true? —I am, etc., INTERESTED. Gordonton, October 10,

INSULATION THEORY

(To the Editor) Sir,—The National Party says that New Zealand cannot be insulated and then in the next-breath says that the National Party will not cut present commitments. It cut expenditure down when it was nowhere near its present level. Pensions, social services, education, public works, defenceare on record levels. It cut these before and now says that there was no need to, thus proving that Labour was right. The National Party says it is going to spend more on defence and social services and provide more money for home building and furniture, and Is not going to cut wages or lengthen hours. It ridicules Labour about insulation, so I, with many others, would like to know how the National Party is going to have insulation f(Tt* New Zealand.—l am, etc., SEEKER. Cambridge, October 10.

POLITICAL QUESTIONS

(To the Editor) Sir,—Would some National organisation or candidate enlighten us on some of the following natural queries that come to the mind of the average elector: (1) The compensation minimum price.—How much? (2) Reduction of farm and other costs. —How? (3) If by making two do the work of three, what becomes of the third? (4) How is it proposed to solve farmers’ labour difficulties? Is it by creating unemployment elsewhere? (5) Apart from land taxation, whose taxation will be reduced? (6) A promise to carry out the Government’s public works programme has been made. How will the reduction in revenue be made up? (7) What are the proposed social security benefits? (8) How much, when, and to whom? (9) What are the contributions? Are they to be paid by both employer and employee, and" how much? (10) If the Rent Restriction Act is annulled, will rents increase? (11) If successful, will the Cabinet be formed by open election or by selection from the old members?—l am, QUESTIONNAIRE. Hamilton, October 10.

EFFECT OF PRICE FALL

(To the Editor"! Sir, —It is not true that the late Government drastically reduced the purchasing power of wages with disastrous consequences to the country. The purchasing power of wages is shown on page 762 of this year's Year Book. The figures show that the effective wages were 3.7 per cent, higher in 1933 than in 1928. The great fall in prices more than balanced the cuts in nominal wage rates. It Is not true that our external credits accumulated in London because a faulty financial policy gave us insufficient money to purchase the imports our exports entitled us to purchase, and it Is not true that any such accumulation caused the depression? In 1931 our exports were down by £20,000,000. We had a great army of unemployed, and farmers were facing ruin all over the Dominion. Yet in 1931, in place of accumulating external credits, we had such a shortage of credits that the Government was ensure a sufficiency for its own reforced to commandeer the supplies to quirements. Only the arbitrary raising of the exchange rate, by stimulating exports and checking imports, caused the credits to accumulate. Want of money had nothing to do with the accumulation. Between 1928 and 1933 our fixed deposits increased by £10.000,000, and it must he remembered that owing to the great fall in prices our £57,000,000 of deposits in 1933 were equivalent in purchasing power to £72,000,000 in 1928. . Neither money nor labour supplies were fully employed, because the returns from industry had fallen in far greater degree than the costs involved in production. The fall of 4 0.7 per cent, in our export price with a fall of only 13.3 per cent, in the prices of our imports involved, in meeting our debt charges and purchasing our Imports, a loss of goods of the value of £24,000,000—equivalent, to 24.4 per cent. 1 of our 1933 output. The Government j could no more have “insulated” us i from that great and almost ruinous fall in the purchasing power of our exports than it could “insulate” us from this year’s fall of over £6,000,000 jn the purchasing power of our wool, and every Minister knows it perfectly well.—l am, etc.. J. JOHNSTONE. Manurewa, October 9

ALLEGED BETRAYAL

(To the Editor) Sir. —T have been been reading of Mr Chamberlain's visit to Herr Hitler, and the final surrender of other people’s property. It all happened in the last two weeks of September. Anyone would think that, the matter had never been thought of before, and the summoning of Mussolini was just on the spur of the moment., instigated by Mr Lyons, Prime Minister of Australia. I was surprised on reading to-day in the Moscow News, published on August 15* and probably written a weekbefore. as it was copied from the Trud I have had this copy on hand nearly a week) : “Discussing Lord Runciman’s mission, to Prague, L. Petrov, writing in the newspaper Trud, says that having received the necessary instructions from Hitler and 1 the virtual support of the French and i British Governments, the Tlenleinites have adopted a sharper and more challenging tone towards the Czechoslovakian Government. It is not at all impossible, and this was also discussed in Paris (during the AngloFrench negotiations of July 20-23),” continues Petrov, “that the Prague negotiations will be broken off "by Ilenlein. British diplomacy has already prepared a way out in this eventuality —namely, the convention of a conference of four Powers, Britain, France, Germany and Ttaly. to settle the socalled Czechoslovakian question without the participation of Czechoslovakia herself. There is the possibility that Lord Runciman's mission of ‘mediation’ will lead to just this, and then cb-in-

berlam will be able to realise his beloved plan for a pact of the four Powers, which is to serve as a means of coming to terms with the aggressors by deciding the fate of other peoples and countries of capitalist Europe in their favour.” Just another betrayal of the Conservatives or of a Chamberlain, just as his father, Facing-Both-Ways Joe Chamberlain betrayed Gladstone on the Home Bute question, or as the Abyssihians were betrayed, as well as the democratic legal Government of Spain, which was betrayed in preventing the three hypocritical Powers, Britain. France and America, from supplying munitions to the legal Government of Spain while permitting Italy and Germany to supply both munitions and men to the rebels. In passing. I might say Mr Joseph Chamberlain was such a good Repub- i Mean that, being Mayor of Birming- j ham when the Prince of Wales (after- j wards Edward VII.) visited Birming- | ham, Mr Chamberlain refused to meet j him or shake hands with him. But ] what a Jingo he afterwards became! I During the Boer War he outjingoed the Jingoes. T suppose the present Mr Chamberlain will go to the country shortly and will use his last betrayal as evidence of his peacefulness and j of a tri'umph of diplomacy in betraying i a people who helped Britain beat- the j Germans in the Great War. No doubt i he will win the same as his pearly won j on the rearmament question during the j Abyssinian War. and never did .a hand's ! turn when they were returned to prevent Ttaly from taking Abyssinia.—l j am, etc., » W. B. McMANUS. Matamati, October 4.