Mr Jones watched as, over the years, the plants grew to 25ft, blotting out the sun's rays and casting his own garden into Stygian gloom.In 1979, friendly discussion having failed, Mr J took action and solicitor's letters were exchanged Meanwhile the cypresses shot above the 30ft mark. Almost every day we read of neighbours who fall out because of the noise made by pet rabbits or, in one famous case, the intolerable racket made by next door's breeding hamsters (was there, perhaps, a bewhiskered Meg Ryan equivalent, given to crying out "Eeeee, eeee, eeeee" at the point of rodentine climax?). This week we have had the latest instalment in a 16-year hedge battle between pensioners Charles Stanton and Michael Jones Back in 1971, when Edward Heath was Prime Minister and T. Otherwise you risk becoming one of those whose minor irritations turn inexorably into savage hatreds, whose lives are devoted to petty acts of aggrandisement and revenge. Stop! Restrain yourself Bottle it up If thy neighbour offends thee, forget it Should he nick your dustbin, offer him your compost heap.

Is it wrong to use my money to jump the queue (as I grew up thinking) or wrong to clog the queue if I can afford to pay? I suppose all Independent readers but me believe the latter, but I am confused.Yours faithfully,G MeynellDerby27 November. From Mr G. Meynell Sir: I am having trouble with Health Service ethics. Bolaji AkinyemiLondon, W2The writer is a former Nigerian Foreign Minister, now with the pro-democracy movement in Nigeria.. From Mr David Craig Sir: Please inform John Walsh (Diary, 30 November) that the people of Belfast do not speak as if they require a decongestant! I am afraid that he is guilty of typecasting all "oirish" accents as resembling a Dublin brogue.An Ulster accent is very distinct compared to one from the South, as I am sure one would gather from news items.What will he have next week; us all drinking Guinness, eating potatoes, and saying, "By Gorrah, and top o' th' morning to ya"?Yours faithfully,David CraigBelfast30 November.

That some will always break the law should not deter serious consideration of this approach.Yours sincerely,A. As a first step, western countries should legislate that multinationals registered in their countries should conform to western operational standards in their operations in the Third World, just as the US Congress has legislated that US corporations cannot engage in corrupt practices abroad. That is the case with Nigeria, Shell and Ogoniland.The solution is an international convention stipulating that multinationals are under an obligation to have comparable operational standards all over the world. The consequence of such an argument is that when nationals of a Third World country and the international community become outraged at the business environment of that country, multinationals which have become part of the environment cannot claim innocence. From Professor A. Bolaji Akinyemi Sir: Regarding the ongoing debate on your pages between Anita Roddick (Another View, 28 November) and your correspondents (Letters, 1 December) on Shell and Ogoniland, the central issue seems to be getting out of focus. The real issue is: are the operational standards of Shell in the Delta area of Nigeria comparable to its operational standards in other parts of the world - especially in the developed world? From all available reports, including those of your correspondent in Nigeria, David Orr (30 November and 1 December), the standards of Shell fall below what would be accepted in Europe and the US.It is no defence for anyone to argue that a multinational operating in the Third World has to conform to the Third World business environment. It may be all right for parents, and adults in general, to repeat myths that they believe are true, such as God and heaven; but it is surely wrong to repeat myths that we know are false.

I find it shocking that any responsible person should seriously argue in favour of telling children deliberate lies. Yours faithfully,Anna FreemanLeighton Buzzard. From Ms Anna Freeman Sir: Virginia Ironside (Dilemma, 30 November) perpetuates the lie that Father Christmas isn't a lie but a myth, and indeed that myths aren't lies at all. A wide variety of views was expressed, put with both determination and humour. It was a conversation in which Mrs Clinton freely participated, demonstrating a reflective intelligence and considerable knowledge of the issues.Had Polly Toynbee listened to the conversation, instead of trying to dictate it through her own agenda of questions to Mrs Clinton, she might have had a clearer understanding of what was going on.Journalists who attend meetings of this kind, and then do a hatchet job on their host, are the cause of the "anodyne views" and "carefully manicured" words that Polly Toynbee deplores.Yours faithfully,Tessa BlackstoneMaster, Birkbeck CollegeElizabeth SymonsGeneral SecretaryThe Association of FirstDivision Civil ServantsLondon, SW1. What Ms Toynbee describes as "buzz words" are real issues to many women, as those on zero-hours contracts and pitiful pay for part- timers know all too well. Justice may yet be done should the artist be reincarnated as a dairy cow.Yours sincerely,Paul GaynorOffice ManagerPeople for the EthicalTreatment of AnimalsLondon, NW128 November.

From Baroness Blackstone and Ms Elizabeth Symons Sir: We wonder whether Polly Toynbee ("What have they done to Hillary?", 30 November) was at the same meeting we attended at the American Embassy on Wednesday.Her report was a serious misrepresentation of an interesting and stimulating discussion. To give a more cutting edge to the subject, may I suggest that in his next piece he merely directs people to their local slaughterhouse where they can really experience the horrors awaiting the 750 million animals that we kill every year to satisfy our craving to consume animal flesh.A true artist should be able to represent life and death - not be the cause of it. From Mr Paul Gaynor Sir: As one of the protesters at the Tate Gallery this Monday who temporarily prevented people exercising their right to view two dead carcasses, I must express my disappointment at the moral bankruptcy of the judges of the Turner Prize and the winning artist. However you view the exhibit, given the chance, it increased the demand for dead animals by two, created unnecessary suffering and death and cheapened the life of a mother and child.Apparently the judges were impressed by the artist's ability to deal with the issues of life and death. What does this udderless cow mean? Is there a hidden agenda here: is it a cynical joke? Is it an existential exercise? Or, after the calf had been paid for, did funds not run to a real milking cow so an immature heifer was bought instead?Once one has seen the problem one suspects a fraud; if there is not integrity in a work considered to be so important, whatever are the values of both artist and critic? I am having real trouble in suspending my disbelief, and await the explanation from the pundits hopefully, in order that understanding may awaken appreciation.Yours sincerely,Barbara SpringSaltash, Cornwall29 November. The poor divided creature accompanied by a calf could never have suckled any child, being to all appearances perfectly udderless: the full bag of rich and beautiful milk that gives life to calf and child, that makes a cow a cow, is simply not there.Having given the work a name ("Mother and child divided: cow and calf") the viewer presumes the artist intends something meaningful about the work. I, too, but particularly because of a problem with the inherent nature of the work. Anyone who has seen a cow must have a problem with Damien Hirst's cow. We looked up through all that music, light and poetry; and what we looked up to drew us to Himself..