MINISTERIAL VISIT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1436, 22 April 1905, Page 2

MINISTERIAL VISIT.

MR. LI3SANT CRAYTON’S REPLY

.(To the Editor Gisborne TimeSj Gisborne, April 20. . . Sir, —The honor you have done mo by" considering my letter of the 19th worthy of editorial notice almoßt overwhelms me, but tempts me yet again to question your views. I am, as you surmise, anxious that the opinions—which I do not hold alone should bo given publicity, and that wild and unfounded statements should no longer go unoontradioted in view—as you state of the approaching elections, so that the time comes the people of this constittT- / enoy.wilj bo able to consider both sides of the political position. In this-Case yonc leading article is somewhat difficult to answer, for the reason that there stems i little more that generalities in it, but when you deem it extraordinary that I should enter the list on behalf of Mr Herries, I may explain that it is because I have a leaning towards fair play, and an attack upon a gentleman in his absence called for >~ some comment, especially as your readers will fully recognise the ability of that gentleman himseir-to have annihilated your arguments had ho the opportunity,. If I did not know the importance that attaches to your utterances, and the sound- >, ness at ail timos of your arguments, X should feel disposed to question your logic, 4 when you state that Mr Horries had nothing of public interest to say, and yet you devote an entire leading article to the discussion of his utterances, and when you quarrel with the time and place for hia , granting an interview and yet eagerly iuj. sert an interview with tboHon. Hail-Jories (also a visitor), which even you most ad- » nut was intended to have some electioneering value. Your “ delicacy” in the matter I therefore confess I cannot appreciate, be- j cause. it appears in an - inappreciable quantity. The moderation and absence from bias, on which you are to be congra- v tulated, is apparent when you “ have no y desire to attribute' unworthy motives” to me, but suspect me of a view to “ personal aggrandisement.” j. might with justice adopt the same line of thought and, while not suspecting you of meroonary attribute your espousal of tho present ad- J ministration’s cause to a desire to retain : Government advertising. But, perish tho , thought ! You inadvertently foster tho ’. opinion that tho Ministers of the Crown* are our musters, by alluding to tho great ’ “ honor done the district” by their visit - i and by confessing to tho “ earnest solicitation” required to induce the visit. Again I am desolated at baviog to differ from you,' as I hold the Ministers of tho Crown to bo the servants of tho people,and not our masters, and that as our servants it is their duty to give the public plain and i correct statements and not misleading I figures. This is why I askod you, as their ardent and most capablo supporter, to en- - lighten us as to the way in which tho Hon, 1. Hall-Jones’ £14,000 had been expended* y a boro for roads and bridges, when I coull *f' - only trace £2IOO as having been spent in" I Cook County. It is not my place to pro- i vide you or your friends with ammunition, ? therefore I leave the unravolling of tho 3 figures to yourself. But, Sir, supposing r* j that tho Minister’s figures wore correct., is certainly is not much to boast of,when you 1 consider that during tho past year this port has contributed £27,636 in Customs duties alone to the General Administrate - K * aod revenue from land and income '< stamps, registration fees, etc. (the figures of which I havo not yes V < fully collated) in addition. When • - wo remember that Westland man- V ages to get £39,000 by way of grants surely we are entitled to clamour for more and to anticipate that a larger proportion of the money which now ' goes to the political octopus, and maintains his sup. -ti' ‘ porters in lucrative billets, may be used to exploit the resources of this district. I am, etc.. . . i .> W. I/ISSANX CIiAYTON,