TOWN EDITION. The Daily Telegraph THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1881.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3233, 10 November 1881, Page 2

TOWN EDITION. The Daily Telegraph THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 1881.

Mr Buchanan's candidature for Napier has provoked the question " what claim has he—an up-country runholder—to the suffrages of tbe people of this borough." This question is a poser, and has never been answered, and tbe old opponents of Mr Buchanan are forced to the conclusion that he is put forward by the half dozen members of a small chapel where the worship of Sir George Grey is still conducted. We are unable to call to mind anything in particular tbat Mr Buchanan has done, except to bow the knee to Sir George, that should call forth the enthusiasm of the electors. But we do know that he has left undone much that he might have done for the benefit of the town. On the night of February 24, 1879, a public meeting was held at tbe Theatre, His Worship the Mayor occupying the chair. The representative and popular character of the meeting may be judgtd of by the fact that on the stage were Messrs Sutton, M.H.R., Banner, Tuxford, Dransfield, Irvine, Rhodes, Neal, Lyndon," Koowles, H. Williams, Tuke, Large, Ellis, and others. The first resolntion was carried with the utmost enthusiasm; it was moved by Mr Dransfield, and was as follows :—" That the present condition of the Napier harbor works, and their failure to fulfil the expectations held out when tbey were begun, are viewed by thrs meeting with much disappointment, and, further, this meeting is of opinion tbat there should be no more public money expended on the extension of the said works." After speeches from Mr Sutton, Mr DeLautour, and Mr Lyndon, Mr Neal moved the following resolution :—" That in the opinion of this meeting, the commerce and shipping business of the port, present and prrtspectiye, call for more acjommodation, and that immediate action ac taken for the purpose of carrying out nore permanent works." Mr Large sesonded the motion, which was again carried unanimously. Mr Ellis then moved, ' That to meet this pressing want it is lesirable to consider the adoption of Mr McGregor's plans for a breakwater as irepared by him in 1873, and to invite hat gentleman to visit Napier for the jurpose of making further inspection of he roadstead." This was seconded by Sir H. Williams, and carried without lissent. Mr Tuke next moved, " Tbat he chairman of this meeting be authorsed to present to the Harbor Board a letition embodying these resolutions,, ivith ft request to the Board to take the

su'ojeot into truest consideration at an early datd." The resolution was seconded by Mr Banner, and carried with acclamation. Now ifct us see to what extent Mr Buchanan identified himself with this movement, and what course he took (o further it. The day following the public meeting the Harbor Board met for the first time under the constitution of the Act of 1878. There were present Messrs. J. A. Smith,J. Bucb.anan,J. Stuart.J H Vautier, J. N. Wilson, H. C. Robjohns, J. G. Kinross, aud Uolonel Lambert. Mr Buchanan was elected chairman. In the course of tbe proceedings Mr Vautier presented the petition in accordance with the resolution of the public meeting, and moved that it be at once considered. Colonel Lambert urged delay, as also did Mr Kinross. The question came to the following division: For delay, Messrs. Wilson, Kinross, and Lambert; against, Messrs. Snitth. Stuart, Robjobns, and Vautier. Mr Vautier's motion for the immediate consideration of the petition was therefore absolutely carried, but' it was pointed out to Mr Buchanan tbat as chairman be had two votes, and if he chose he could defeat the wishes of the public of Napier. And this he did! But in exercising this authority he said it was with the distinct understanding that the petition should be discussed in a fortnight. We may observe both Mr Wilson and Mr Buchanan were nominated to the Board by the Grey Government, and that those who voted in accordance with the wishes of the public had been elected to their seats by the people. At tbe next meeting of the Board there was a full attendance of members, namely, Messrs Buchanan, (chairman), ' Smith, J. N. Williams, Vautier, Pruart, Lambert, Kinross, Ormond, Robjohns, Common, Wilson, and Miller. Mr Stuart moved, " That Mr McGregor be at once communicated with by the Board, and requested to come up at once and express an opinion." A long discussion ensued, and Mr Stuart's motion was lost. On April 8 the Board met again, and proceeded to the consideration of Mr Vautier's postponed motion in reference to the construction of a breakwater; atter a long debate the motion was put and negatived. The division list ' wa9 as follows:—Ayes, Smiih, Stuart, Robjohns, and Vautier; Noes, Williams, Kinross, Miller, Wilson, Lambert, and Ormond. Where was Mr Buchanan then ? He did not vote at all; the action that he had taken in the first instance had done its work, and he was satisfied. But in July of that year, only a few mor/ths after the events we have recorded, a meeting of large land owners was invited by circular, signed by Mr John Buchanan and Mr J. IT. Williams for the purpose of considering " the construction of a main interior line of railway from Wallingford, . . keeping on the coast side of the Tuki Tuki river (passing through Mr Buchanan's run) till it reaches some suitable locality near the month of that river." Tbis was the celebrated Kidnapper scheme, and this is Mr Buchanan's claim to' the suffrages of the people of Napier!