February 1 1958


February 1 1958


So women are misfits in politics? Says who?

Why are our immigrants cut off from social contacts? ^ Now hear a word in praise of restaurants

What is Mrs. Aitken (Women are misfits in politics, Jan. 4) doing to us, the women of Canada, who have been trying and working so hard to improve the status of women everywhere? Now Mrs. Aitken says we are not fit. How the men must chuckle! Is she trying to un-do all the effort and work it has taken for women to get this far

into municipal, provincial and federal government? — AMY B. HAUFSCHILD,


Do as the Señoritas do

So the men laugh at our new-style shoes (Preview, Dec. 7). Wait until spring, and then listen to the spring chickens cackle. We have been wearing “Cuban” heels for years. Now it’s Italian shoes you say. Those señoritas know how to dress. In the spring of 1958, we will be right up on our toes. Just you wait, fellows, those who laugh last laugh LONGEST.-MAY A. WILLCOX,


The leading man wasn’t there

In your issue of Dec. 21 (Preview) you say that Daniel Massey “won high praise over the head of lead Walter Pidgeon.” I would like to point out that in the particular (London) production of The Happiest Millionaire to which you are referring, the lead is taken by Canadian actor Robert Beatty. This is not to belittle Daniel’s achievement, which is a very substantial one in any case. Really I guess I'm writing because I’m so mad you didn't give me a plug—I’m in it too!


Immigrants are like everybody else

Concerning your Jan. 4 article probing the mental problems of this country’s immigrants: I personally immigrated

more than six years ago. Materially I have done well enough to keep equal with native Canadians. Social contacts, however, have never developed; this is where I suffer like many an immigrant. Although I’m in my early twenties, have a late-model car, a good job and security, three tries at getting a date have been refused. I am not likely to try again. I don’t know what’s wrong with us immigrants: we are no different from everybody else. Your article came very much to the point.


Sidney Katz’ article ignores the great success we have had in absorbing New Canadians in places like Crocus, Man., or Gopher Creek, Alta. Villages or hamlets with populations of 200 have successful examples to answer the financial, sex, language, cultural and “vertical adjustment” problems. When you come right down to it, who in hell needs a psychiatrist west of Winnipeg? Why not give the New Canadian a break and start him away from these large boiling vats of humanity? — GRAY CAMPBELL, COWLEY, ALTA.

Water always warm in Toronto?

I've just finished reading the article by McKenzie Porter (Jan. 4) about Dave Caplan, the jazz-mad tailor. What in the world is the significance of this individual and his story? The daily activities of this tag-marker (not a tailor) who fancies himself as a gate-crasher have no interest. And another thing I took a dislike to: there are no coldwater flats in Toronto. It’s a term and phenomenon that may apply to East Side New York but not Ward Four South.—RALPH HOROWITZ, TORONTO.

First Lady running third?

Re your article on Mrs. Diefenbaker (Dec. 21), I think the title First Lady should not be applied to the prime minister’s wife. In the trinity that is the Canadian constitutional system— Queen, governor-general, prime minister—I would say the PM's spouse ranks a poor THIRD.-ANDREW RIOSA. ST. CATHARINES, ONT.

Slop knocking restaurants

Your Jan. 4 issue contains an article which is in very poor taste. It’s written by a Mr. Hugh Garner and headed My Recipe for Eating Out and Staying

Alive. No doubt Mr. Garner had his tongue in his cheek when he penned the article, hoping for a rise such as he is getting out of me, but that is no excuse for bad literary manners. At this season of the year, a little praise for the hardworking humans in the restaurants, who are up early in the morning and on their feet late at night, would be more to the point and the common GOOD.-E. MARTIN, MANAGER,




Continued from page 4

^Teach children respect ¿^Rich teachers poor?

If it is fair to say that Canada’s teachers are “in the chips” (Background, Dec. 21) because they make more money than municipal-government workers and business employees, it is also fair to say that Canada's unemployed are fabulously wealthy because their weekly income from unemployment insurance is more than the $1.56 which the Pakistani worker brings home. If you handed in an assignment like that in my class, I would transfer you to a class for those with retarded logic. — EMERSON LAVENDER, BURLINGTON, ONT.

Chiropody by license only

An article on modern shoes appeared in the issue of Maclean’s for December 7th wherein you quote the professional opinion of one D. Waslow.

I would like to point out that this person is not registered with our board and we have no knowledge of him whatsoever.

Chiropodists who wish to practice in Ontario or other provinces of Canada have to be registered with their respective boards and obtain a license to do so.—


Your gun, ni'lord

Baxter in his bi-weekly letter says the sons of the great houses of England did not wait for conscription in the First World War, and seems to account it as a great virtue. But come to think of it why should they? After all. they and their caste owned Britain and everything and everybody in it to fully 90% — they could

not expect the submerged, poverty-stricken masses to lead the way, could they? Personally, I waited until I was called and have no apologies or regrets.—JOHN LEWIS, MONTREAL.

No deals with Red wolves?

Re your Dec. 21 editorial. NATO Can’t Frighten Khrushchev, So Let’s Decide on Our Compromises: for years now the West has regarded the Communist bloc the way a lonely trapper regards a ravenous pack of wolves. Since no one negotiates with a wolf pack. I am wondering whether you think our trapper has been mistaken about the nature of the beasts on his trail? Or do you simply think that his straits are so desperate that he must decide to toss a couple of

dogs to the wolves? Maclean’s doesn’t spell phonetically. For “negotiation,” try your typewriter on A-P-P-E-A-S-EM-F-N-T.—HUGH MYERS, IRMA, ALTA.

Commandments critic confused?

It seems to me that Brock Chisholm is back on the "Old Chisholm Trail” of confusion in his article. The Pitfalls of the Ten Commandments (Dec. 21). In my estimation he contradicts himself. He states that the character of an adult depends upon what he has been taught as a child. Now an adult must have respect for authority and therefore it would seem to follow logically that a child must be taught that very lesson, namely to respect AUTHORITY.-JOHN T. REIDV, WAPEL-


^ Who so ill qualified to write about the Ten Commandments as Brock Chisholm —one who denies morality, who advo-

cates birth control and the adoption of colored children in preference to one's own, and thinks that the ideals of communism can’t he improved upon; who rejects Christianity in favor of science: who believes that mental hygiene is the means to remodel mankind; who holds the view that anyone who objects to the “benefits" conferred by citizenship in the proposed World Order is quite definitely non compos mentis. Brock Chisholm is a definite menace to Canada.—c. M. CAD-


Spirit of Canada in cross cover?

Maclean’s of December 21 has the most eloquent cover I have ever seen on a magazine (I speak as an inveterate magazine reader). Duncan Macpherson has masterfully woven together the basic ingredients of art: truth, beauty, goodness. In this single painting, we have the spirit of Canada. — DOUGLAS ROCHE,


Are Canadians second-class workers?

I am writing on behalf of myself and the other Canadians helping to operate the Canadian section of the Dcwlinc. We wish to draw attention to an article currently appearing in an American magazine which states that “the Liberal government, at C. D. Howe's direction, insisted that Canadians working on the Dewline be paid 20% less than their American co-workers.” In view of the fact that we Canadians do the same work as the Americans, we wish to know:

(a) Why should we be penalized for being Canadians?

(b) Was the Liberal government expressing the opinion of the Canadian people when it clearly implied: “a Canadian worker is worth less than an American worker"?

We Canadians on the Dewline are eagerly awaiting the views of your readers pertaining to the inferiority of the Canadian WORKER.-H. A., EDMONTON. ★