Letters

May 15 1938

Letters

May 15 1938

Letters

The Queen and Furs

An editorial in your March 15 issue states that Canadian silver fox has declined in popularity because Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth favors beige fox color.

I fear, sir, that you have been misinformed. The popularity of Canadian silver fox has not declined. Certainly the quality which the Queen would wear has not. On the contrary. The brokers frequently complain that of good quality Canadian silver fox there is not enough. True, there is plenty of trash about, trading on the good name of silver fox, and much of it comes from European countries.

The present Queen has never favored much fur. Neither did her predecessor, Queen Mary. But this has not affected the ever-growing sale of furs.

Queen Elizabeth has accepted somewhat the trend of fashion by appearing in a mink coat, much to the joy of the mink farmers. Yet this coat is not luxurious in cut or design, and furs are tending more that way each season. The Queen’s taste leans to economy. Silver fox garments, on the other hand, become more elegant and luxurious each year. And their popularity has not waned, as a glance at British society functions will bear witness.

Elizabeth Rydon, London representative, Fur Trade Journal of Canada.

(The information used in the editorial referred to was given to Maclean’s by a wellknown Canadian fur farmer.—The Editor.)

That Moose-Glue “Prop”

I wish to correct a number of misstatements in the article, “Moose-Glue Prop,” by Philip Godsell in the January 15 issue of your magazine.

i was chief mechanic with the Imperial Oil flying party at the time of which Mr. Godsell writes, so I should know whereof I speak,

Mr. Godsell states that the making of this propeller at Fort Simpson in 1921 was entirely the work of Walter Johnson, an employee of the Hudson’s Bay Company at Fort Simpson. You will note that my name is not even mentioned as having anything to do with the undertaking.

Without desiring to be in any way egotistical, 1 should like to contradict emphatically Mr. Godsell’s statement in this connection, and to say that it was I, and not Mr. Johnson, who was primarily responsible for the making of this propeller. 1 was assisted at times by Mr. Johnson, who was an experienced carpenter, in such work as the planing of the oak boards to prepare them for gluing, and in the actual work of gluing the boards together, also in some of the minor work connected with the hewing and shaping of the laminated assemblybut fully eighty per cent of the work, including the solving of the various engineering and constructional problems involved, was done by myself.

Mr. Godsell claims that the idea of making a propeller at Fort Simpson was first conceived and suggested by Mr. Johnson. This statement I must also refute, and again state, without desiring to be egotistical, that it was 1 and not Mr. Johnson who first suggested that a propeller could be made. As a matter of fact, prior to our departure from Edmonton on this pioneer flight, I had discussed this very question with the other members of our flying party, and we had debated on the possibility of being able to make a propeller in the hinterland should such an emergency ever arise. I had then declared that, provided the necessary material and facilities were available, I believed I could successfully make a propeller. So, when the emergency did actually arise at Fort Simpson, Mr. Gorman immediately said to me, “Well, Bill here’s your chance to

prove what you said about being able to make a propeller.”

Do not misunderstand me and think that I am trying to belittle the part which Mr. Johnson played, as he deserves great credit for the valuable and wholehearted assistance which he rendered, and for the splendid way in which he co-operated at all times to make the undertaking a success. I am merely setting forth facts—facts which were ignored by Mr. Godsell.

A further point: Mr. Godsell implies that the Hudson’s Bay Company was responsible for waking us up at 5 a.m. on the day of our departure from Fort Simpson, in order to inform us that the ice in the Mackenzie River (where our plane was parked) was beginning to go out. This is not correct, as we were awakened by a white trapper by the name of Jack Cameron, who at the time had been staying with the manager of the Northern Trading Company at Fort Simpson and who, on learning that the ice in the Mackenzie River was beginning to go out, came to waken us entirely on his own initiative.

Mr. Godsell also gives the impression that we had delayed our departure from Fort Simpson unnecessarily, which was the cause of our plane being on the river when the ice was threatening to break up. This, again, is incorrect as we could not possibly have departed any sooner than we did. It was not until the previous day that the homemade propeller was ready for a test flight, and by the time the test flight was finished, insufficient daylight remained to permit of our taking off for, and completing the flight to, Peace River, before darkness would have set in.— W. J. Hill, Asst. Plant Supt., Ontario Provincial Air Service, Sault Ste. Marie.

Claims Baxter’s Attitude Repellent

Some Americans are not so “self-satisfied” in their ignorance as Beverley Baxter avers. Some of us may have a tetter knowledge of history than he credits us with.

Mr. Baxter says we owe a debt to Great Britain, mainly due to the action of the British Navy at Manila Bay. Britain sided with Dewey against Germany, it is true. Was it because of a great love of America or because of a greater dislike of Germany? Would British interests have been well served had Germany been given her way in the Orient? Was it love of American cousins, altruism, or selfinterest?

He says that Great Britain poured capital into the States by “endless millions” after the Civil War not during that war. It was during the war that millions were poured into the Confederate States then in rebellion against the Union. Mr. Baxter omits to state that Great Britain was very near to recognition of the Confederacy at one time. Let Mr. Baxter inform himself on some of those unfriendly acts between 1861 and 1865. And he might inform himself as to what it was that prevented recognition of the Confederacy. He admits loans to the Confederacy and says they remain unpaid. It is a case of backing the wrong horse.

Those endless millions poured into the States after the Civil War were not loans or gifts. They were investments which paid nice returns in dividends and interest. Nothing philanthropic about it. Nothing of idealism or love of Yankees,

Mr. Baxter has not presented us in a very favorable light to our Canadian neighbors. He has done a disservice to our friendly relations. He may persuade some Canadians to think we are a bad lot of ingrates. This is true elsewhere among British peoples.

Almost overnight “Uncle Sammie” became “Uncle Shylock” through British propaganda. Many years will be required

to expunge from our minds the sneers, jibes, yes, insults, many of us had to endure from British tongues.

The United States Government, with the aid of British propaganda, borrowed large sums of money from American people and loaned it to the Allies. We taxpayers have noted that not all of that money was “War Loans.” Much of it went for rearmament and war measures of the future. We taxpayers bear the burden of unpaid loans and interest. Most of us have accepted the loss and marked it off. But we do not relish being scolded by a Member of the British Parliament.

Some of us cannot help wondering what might be the status were the conditions reversed. If it were the United States that owed the War Loans, would we hear so much about cancellation?

Mr. Baxter seems to be asking for an alliance between Great Britain and the United States. He almost demands it. He has not taken the pleasant way of bringing it about. His attitude is more repellent than winning.

He wishes that President Roosevelt might make “some such speech.” And so do Mr. Roosevelt’s political opponents. Such a speech would end Mr. Roosevelt’s career amid gales of derisive laughter. —R. L. Prather, La Mesa, Calif.

Dislikes Modern Government

May I express to you how much I enjoy reading the contents of your magazine? I believe you have a great opportunity at the present time of educating people, and perhaps leading them into a realization of the danger of the political times into which we have fallen.

Landing in Toronto in 1872, I have lived under the guidance of such men as Sir John Macdonald, Sir Wilfrid Laurier, Sir John Thompson, Sir Leonard Tilley, the Tupper family, etc. What a contrast to the rulers of the present day! Is it a wonder that men are beginning to look toward England or some other part of the British Empire as a place where they can live and invest their money with some sort of feeling of security and pleasure in life. This feeling will grow unless there is some distinct change in the government. The people of Canada today are governed to death, with ever-increasing taxes.— F. V. Hulpatt, Toronto.

Poor Apple Packing

An editorial in your April 15 number re standard grading of commodities for export, was very timely. How about bringing it down to interprovincial trade?

Why do the shippers of Ontario fruits to the West continue to face their barrels and hampers of apples with large rosy specimens, while at the centre they insert small green scrubs? In our last shipment every pack was put up this way. It may be an easy way to dispose of the culls, but it is a very poor way to build up a market. Until some assurance is given that the packing is uniform, there will be no more shipments to this district. Many of us would pay more for the Ontario fruit, but refuse to be gypped. B. C. fruit is equally good anywhere in the box.

I have seen the same deception in basket fruit as well. It is at least a shortsighted policy.—J. B. McCubbin, Three Hills, Alta.

Twins 92 Years Old

Your Scrapbook in the April 15 number claims the Wendorff twins are the oldest in North America. Born April 16, 1846.

The Bloomfield Democrat, of Bloomfield, Iowa, January 13 number, has a picture of the Rader Sisters, of Pulaski, Iowa, who were born on January 13, 1838. I think the sisters are both still alive.—F. F. Pottorff, Leo, Alta.