The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

KINSMEN FIELD DAY WINNERS Winners in the children's races on the Kinsmen Field day were:- 3 to 4 yrs. mixed - Mario Commisso, Shirley Ross, Greg .Bottomley. Girls 6 & under - Linda Commisso, Shelley Souliere, Patricia McGrath. Boys 6 & under- Paddy Stokes, Douglas Condie, Jim McParland. Girls 7 - Linda Singleton, Rae Sisson, Lynn Drake. Boys 7 = Billy Souliere, Michael Souliere, Denis Courtemanche. Girls 8 - Lorraine Levigne, Maxine Hubelit, Susan McParland. Boye 8 - Michael Roen, Mark Stokes, David Bedard. Girls 9 - Susan Johnson Carol Webb, Darlene Desmoulins. Boys 9 - Kim Gellert, Ricky Spadoni, Lawrence Madge. Girls 10- Kathy Stokes, Sheila McParland, Bonnie Wood. Boys 10 = Tony Commisso, Bob Fummerton, Bob Nesbitt. Girls 11 - Diane Singleton, Margaret Borutski, Rebeka Lang. Boys 11 - Bruce Bottomley, Greg. Mclsaac, Mike Spadoni. Girls 12-13 - Mary Spez- iale, Sandra Ross, Marilyn Cook. Boys 12-13 - Dennis Levigne, Vincent Pasqualine, Raymond Suni. Girls 14 and over - Helen Harness, Colleen Maclsaac Betty Morris. Boys 14 and over - David McCutcheon Brian Hewson, Bill Drake & Norman Bottomley (Tied). Girls 3-legged - Mary Speziale and Colleen Mclsaac Helen Harness and Heather Tremblay - Debby & Lynn Jolicoeur. Boys 3-legged - Dennis Levigne and Albert Courtemanche - Michael & Stanley Spadoni - Bill Drake & Brian Hewson. Judges for the races were Mrs.Pat Mulligan, Rev. Fraser Muldrew - Dick Remillard of the Soo and Peter Speziale. Gostume prizes and others, in the parade, were awarded by judges Mrs.D'Arcy McGuire, Mrs . Bill Furlonger and Mrs.Lester McCuaig to:- The Flintstones - Brenda & Carol Dimmery - The Beatles - Rhonda Maclsaac, Kelly Kirby, Bobby Bol- an and Colette lalonde - Scarcrow - Sharon Scott. Prizes for best decorated tricycles went to David Muldrew & Timmy Johnson: Decorated prams to Maxime Holland, Donna Bottomley and Maureen Hencher: decorated bicycles to Jolene Zaporzan, Jane Roffey, Linda Birch & Cathy Bottomley (tied). Working for the day were Bill and Lorraine Weaver, Mary and Peter Speziale, Eva Gordon, Bill and Glorie Miller, Hazel Bailey, Daryl Lynn Weaver, George, Joy and Sharon Riley, Merla McCuaig, Gino and Frankie Cataford, Bob and Jackie Turner, Jack Gordon, Ralph and Dorothy Hewson, Al Pearson and Jim Figliomeni. Draw prizes were won by Stephen Speziale ($100), Mike Smilsky ($50) and Sheila Einarson of Fort Wil- liam ($25). CERTIFICATES PRESENTED CGIT GRADUATES The following members received their graduation certificates from the CGIT at the morning service in St. Andrew's United Church:- Edith Clemens, Sherry Condie, Patsy Dimmery and Sh aron Jarva. Mrs. T.P.Whent presented white leather bibles to the girls, giving a brief resume of the careers of each in the CGIT and the parts they now will take in other phases of Church work. PURITANS OF THE WORLD, ARISE ! & IF you READ ONE OPINION in the paper Monday, it's as sure as death and taxes that you are going to run across the opposite point of view before the week is out. There are the black and white opinions; and there is also a full range of grey in-between shades. One subject bound to bring out the pro and the con is whether or not relief recipients should work for the money. Latest advocate on the work-for-the-money side of the argument is the minister of social welfare and rehabilita- tion in the Saskatchewan Liberal Government, Mr. David Boldt. His suggestion has evoked the usual stern rebukes. On June 11, the Globe and Mail said this: "To the extent that Mr. Boldt can create useful work for the unemployed and pay regular wages for it, good luck to him. But when he proposes to exploit the unemployed and other unfortun- ates by making them labor for their welfare payments, he deserves the sharpest criticism." But just the day before, June 10, a letter to the editor of the same paper had said this: "I sincerely believe that assistance must be given to, say, young widows, struggling to bring up a family; the disabled; the blind; the aged, lonely people, but there are too many props being placed under healthy people who can take care of themselves. As long as this is done, who wants to bother working?" The writer was a woman who, with her husband, brought up seven children during the depression without public assistance and the wages coming into the home were $21 weekly. There are the two points of view. An in-between shade, which no one seems to mention in this perennial dialogue, can be put in a question: "Has anyone asked the man or woman who is on relief?" Perhaps local authorities could avoid the opprobrium of the editorial writers and, at the same time, respect the sense of dignity of the man or woman who has an in- grained dislike of accepting relief, by offering a free choice: relief or a job. This might be, in the words of the Globe and Mail, "improving parks and doing clean-up and paint- ing jobs." Others could be added by a thoughtful welfare department without interfering with regular labor. If there are still people around as independent of spirit as the woman who wrote to the editor about her experience in depression days, it may not be naive to think that some would prefer the job to the relief cheque. Whether or not work is desirable as an end in itself also brings up an argument these days. The papers recently have reported more than one expert as saying that the de- sirability of work for the sake of work is a hold-over from the old puritan ethic. Someone may counter any day now with the slogan: Puritans of the world, arise!