In light of the controversy surrounding the carriage horses belonging to John DeShields, what has emerged is that not so very much seems to be known about the horses.

While the majority of horses and ponies are extremely well looked after, a significant number are not. Therefore, I would like to recommend the following: (1) All of the estimated 900 horses and ponies in Bermuda should be licensed by the Government, just as we have to license dogs.

(2) Prior to licensing, Government should require a certificate, signed by the veterinarian (most likely the Government Veterinarian) making the examination to show that the horse or pony is serviceably sound, and has received any required vaccinations.

(3) Every horse and pony should be given a numbered tag to be worn on its halter. In addition, as halters are not worn at all times, the owner of each animal should be given a card containing important information, such as its name, its colour, size, sex and age. This care should be displayed prominently at the stable.

(4) A qualified person should periodically and/or randomly inspect the horse or pony and its stable facilities to ensure animals are in good health, and are properly fed, housed and cared for. This surveillance is essential for each of the commercial stables, riding schools and privately owned horses.

We all remember the famous story of Black Beauty, the horse that began life with an owner who loved him and saw he was properly cared for. In time, Black Beauty had to be sold, and passed from new owner to owner, each of whom starved, overworked and ill-used him for years. Eventually, his original owner discovered Black Beauty's plight, got him back, brought him to good health and looked after him for the rest of Black Beauty's life.

When horses arrive in Bermuda, it is obvious they have been properly cared for and are fully serviceable. The tragic middle part of Black Beauty's story has absolutely no place in Bermuda. Once these horses and ponies are here, let us prevent those who would do so from starving ill-treating and overworking them.

KATIE COOK TERCEIRA, B.H.S.I.I.

Smith's Parish Road safety chief replies April 28, 1999 Dear Sir, I was quite disturbed and shocked to see the report in Tuesday's Royal Gazette , in which Mr. Gareth Finighan totally misrepresented and distorted a telephone interview he conducted with me (in the presence of another) on Monday. Mr. Finighan contacted me and stated that the Police had breathalysed both men earlier in the evening of Saturday's fatal crash. My exact comments were: "We have not received any details about Saturday's incident by the Police and I prefer not to comment on any individual traffic crashes.'' Mr.

Finighan then asked me about the resurfacing of a zero alcohol policy with respect to driving. My exact reply was: "If it does pan out that alcohol was a factor in Saturday's crash, then it would only strengthen our resolve to continue the anti-drink driving message.'' It is important to note that at no time did I warn that the two men had been drinking nor did I raise the issue of a zero tolerance issue as it is stated in the report. How could I, especially when I clearly stated that I had no details and that I preferred not to comment on individual traffic crashes.

The Transport Minister, the Honourable Dr. Ewart Brown told me that the press would misquote me from time to time, however I never dreamed it would be this blatant and deliberate. Unfortunately Mr. Corea's family has had to endure these untruths during the difficult time. We as a Council have gone on record as working on both sides of the inquiry control wheel, and I personally would not sink to the level of insensitivity that is portrayed in Mr. Finighan's report.

This letter should be printed immediately so that Mr. Corea's family will know that the Road Safety Council sends its sincerest condolences and prayers to them during this time.

DELCINA R. BEAN-BURROWS Chairperson Road Safety Council Editor's Note: The Royal Gazette has already published a retraction and an apology with regard to the fact that Mr. Corea was not arrested on suspicion of impaired driving, although the other man was tested after the accident and passed, although he had consumed some alcohol.

We did err in the story when we stated that Ms Bean-Burrows warned that the fact that alcohol had been consumed by both drivers would increase the Raod Safety Council's efforts for a zero-tolerance policy. Further down in the story, Ms Bean-Burrows was quoted stating that if alchohol was involved, it would strengthen the RSC's resolve on the issue.

But the story never said that Ms Bean Burrows raised the issue of zero-tolerance; this was a natural question for the reporter to raise in the circumstances. Nor should it be inferred that Ms Bean-Burrows' statements were distorted because her statement that she does not comment on individual cases was omitted -- the only quotation which was taken out. What was clear from her quotations was that she had made clear she could not comment directly on the accident because she had not received any information from the Police on it.

Gays have rights too The following letter was written to Development and Opportunity Minister Terry Lister and copied to The Royal Gazette .

April 23, 1999 Dear Mr. Lister, I am writing in response to the article in today's Royal Gazette concerning human rights for Bermuda's gay community.

First, I would like to thank you for saying you are open to various points of view and that you are willing to evaluate any concerns brought to your attention. It is extremely rare for a Government Minister to approach this subject objectively in the media.

I am tired of being repeatedly denounced as immoral and unworthy of the same freedoms and protections that you yourself enjoy, particularly when such allegations come from a UBP MP and a Christian minister.

It is fair for me to say I am a law-abiding citizen with an impeccable social and professional record. I make a substantial contribution to this community as a teacher, a writer (in part, for tourism), an active member of several organisations, and a volunteer. Apart from wondering why my sexual orientation automatically categorises me as "immoral and a threat to the moral fabric of society'', I would like someone to tell me why I am any less entitled to the same privileges, protections, and potential for personal growth.

People are, of course, entitled to their opinions. However, people should also remember the Human Rights Act exists so that opinions cannot be used to deny others the same quality of life.

It may interest you to know that following my highly publicised support of the Stubbs Bill in 1994, I have received several obscene and threatening telephone calls, one from an individual with a criminal record in the US; I have been refused service by a waitress in a Hamilton restaurant; I have been obstructed by a supermarket cashier in front of other customers while paying for my groceries; I have been told by a nationally recognised organisation that my sexual orientation makes me an unacceptable candidate as a volunteer (I have since been awarded `Volunteer of the Year' by another); and I am repeatedly subjected to numerous discriminating remarks in public and in the media.

We have a legal system in place. The basic purpose of the legal system is to ensure that all people enjoy the same rights and freedoms while observing the same restrictions. Surely, the fact that one person is different from another is not, in itself, grounds for denying any person those rights and freedoms.

The Human Rights Act currently recognises that discrimination against a person according to race, place of origin, colour, ancestry, disability, being born out of wedlock, gender, religious conviction, the possibility of bearing a child (in or out of wedlock), political affiliation or marital status is an offence.

What people (including Mrs. Gordon-Pamplin and Mr. Santucci) think of homosexuals is not my concern. What disturbs me is that they and everyone else in Bermuda has a legally administered tribunal to which they may address such grievances when they occur. I, on the other hand, do not.

It cannot be denied that people like Mrs. Gordon-Pamplin and Mr. Santucci are attempting to force me and other people to conform to their opinions. They are saying I am not entitled to the same rights they already have, simply because my sexual orientation is different from theirs. This, alone, is discriminatory.

Mr. Lister, please show me the legislation that states I have a legal obligation to conform to Mr. Santucci's religious convictions or Mrs.

Pamplin's political views -- never mind their sexual orientation! We are not discussing the "laws'' of a particular minister's religious faith which apply only to his congregation, or the personal outlook of an MP who, as far as I'm concerned, owes me and my exemplary parents an apology. (How dare she imply a homosexual child is in any way inferior to her own!) We are discussing legislation in a democratic country, a single body to which we all belong and to which I believe we all have the responsibility to live respectfully towards one another, despite our inherent differences.

People can think and say what they wish. The fact remains there is a loophole in the management of this country's human affairs. Until sexual orientation is incorporated into the fabric of Bermuda's Human Rights Act, this government is itself perpetuating discrimination against a large number of its citizens.

PETER CARPENTER Pembroke Dr. Smith should resign April 21, 1999 Dear Sir, Some eight weeks ago you printed a letter of mine criticising/condemning the Rev. Dr. Goodwin Smith for his bigoted view of homosexuality.

I wrote a separate letter asking to meet with Dr. Smith and called the Human Rights Commission some four or five times daring/challenging Dr. Smith to face me.

In my letter to you I explained that maybe Dr. Smith could better understand white racist views of him -- just another form of bigotry.

But I must echo the view of Michael Stubbs that Dr. Smith is a narrow minded man and not the sort of person to sit in judgment. He therefore should resign from the chairmanship of the HRC. I would be willing to sit in his place.

In fact, I challenge Dr. Smith to a public debate on these issues of any time or any place. And who am I? Just someone who will stand up for the little man on a philosophical matter of principle.

Finally, why was this brought up in the Senate by Pat Pamplin in the first place? Obviously she is the kind of person the UBP should desperately want in the House of Parliament. Or should we be glad they dug so deep into their repository of approved candidates? SANDERS-FRITH BROWN Warwick Truth the first casualty April 18, 1999 Dear Sir, What has happened to the murdered Serbs in Kosovo? Have the Serb Police and army not the right to go to their aid and attack the Albanian rebels? It is not surprising after the admitted killing of nine Serbian Policemen that human hate should cause revenge by the Serbs on the houses occupied by the Albanian rebels.

It is entirely reasonable that if the Albanians do not like living in Yugoslavia that they should go back to their own country and not try to take over part of Yugoslavia. It would be humanitarian to spend the wasted billions in resettling the Albanians in their own country instead of the spiteful, cowardly onslaught of bombers from great height. It is now to save the dubious reputation of President Clinton that these acts are being taken.

As the president said, "truth is the first casualty of war'' and to keep the American public on his side, we are treated to this one sided endless repetitive propaganda. As I understand it, Milosevic has agreed to limited autonomy for the Albanians but steadfastly refused to have foreign troops on his sovereign soil. I am now convinced that might is right and the truth obscured. Since the KLA is fighting from inside Albanian borders it is understandable that the Serbs should attack across the border in a limited action.

I listened with incredulity that Blair of England had demanded that the Serbs should stop forcing the Albanians back into Albania and in the very same speech objected to the Serbs blocking the border and preventing the Albanians from crossing into Albania! There is today talk of arming the rebel KLA.

Whatever next, do we arm all the rebels everywhere including the IRA? Russia accepted apprehensively the spread of NATO eastwards, since it was to be a defensive pact but now that is turning out to be an aggressive one, she and some of the eastern countries have reason to be alarmed. In any case whatever opinion one holds, two wrongs do not make a right and the slaughter of Yugoslavs is not the answer. Does anyone believe that the Albanians will be able to return to Yugoslavia and live in peace after the hate that has beenn engendered by the unjustifiable and illegal bombing without an international army surrounding then for decades to come. Perhaps the risk of the Third World War in this age is worthwhile if it saves Clinton's reputation.

DISILLUSIONED Paget Stop the cell towers April 20, 1999 Dear Sir, The Radiation Emissions Tower erected by BDC is an eyesore within our Warwick community. The areas of Glenwood Park Crescent, Faraway Cottages, parts of South Shore Road, Ord Road and Dunscombe Road are all within the 800 feet and 1,000 feet are considered vulnerable to certain types of potential health risks. This continues to be of grave concern to me.

As I became aware of the research of scientists who have gathered information on the short and long term studies on the effects of such towers, I am distressed that we, as a Country have been inadequate in our pitiful attempts to protect our own health.

We need to take a closer look at diseases that have reoccurred among specific groups of persons who have lived and worked within close proximity of these towers. Can we continue to ignore this danger within our community? There are 38 towers on an Island twenty one miles by one mile. Why? Why did the former Government allow these towers to be in existence at all, and why in such large numbers? Why were they allowed to put these towers in residential, and school areas? Are we that greedy that we allow people who spend a lot of money to come into our home and destroy the health of our citizens? Even a potential risk is warning enough.

I would like to ask all of those persons who are in power to make a difference, to please look at ways to rectify the building of these towers.

Perhaps there may be ways in which the towers are erected at a distance, or towers safety shared and the numbers of towers greatly reduced.

I understand that some towers are essential for modern communications systems but surely not in such a vast numbers on an Island this small.

I look forward to immediate action being taken by the Government to protect us, the citizens of Bermuda.

MRS. TERRY PEARMAN-CASTLE Warwick Stop tower construction April 26, 1999 Dear Sir, I am amazed that Telecommunications Minister Renee Webb suggested that the CARE group was being impatient by having a Webb site to boycott BDC (Royal Gazette, April 14, 1999).

Why hasn't she told BDC to stop being impatient and to put the building of their unwanted cellular tower on hold until the government inquiry has been completed? CONCERNED Warwick