THE GISBORNE ELECTION—MR CARROLL’H CLAIMS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2340, 5 November 1908, Page 6

THE GISBORNE ELECTION—MR CARROLL’H CLAIMS.

[To the Editor,.].

Sir, —The Native Minister again aslis for the voter, of the electors, and. it-is the duty of his constituents to carefully consider his right to do so. About his popularity there is no ■doubt whatever; there is probably no member of Parliament who exercises a greater personal attraction over those with whom the conies in - contact, anti this very attraction renders it difficult to judge his claim to represent us at headquarters. _ M e mnet try to put aside these attributes, which, after all, are not the essential ones in a member of Parliament, unloos he uses them when in. power to advance the interests of the district which he represents. Leaving then these personal attributes aside we can hardly help being driven to the conclusion that the Native 'Minister has not made the use of'the powers and opportunities given him. Poverty Bay is going ahead, and going ahead steadily and surely, but it is in spite of, and not because of, any encouragement given by the Cabinet, of which Mr. Carroll is an important member. The two drawbacks to Poverty Bav are: (1) Lack or railways, and (2) locked-up Native land. No man in the Bay, even though he 'be a most ardent supporter of the Government, can say that we have been fairly treated in the matter ox railways. The work done so far is paltry compared with what remains to ho done, and with what should - have been done many, years ago. Our rolling stock is beneath contempt, our railway construction is a farce. There has been a considerably increased vote this year, hut the reason is obvious. It was the approach of the election and not Mr. .Carroll's efforts which was responsible for that vote. So long as the Government think that tills’ is a seat entirely their oivn, so long will railway construction linger. Every elector in the Bay ’knows this, and we should take thought. It may be said that our member is not responsible for this neglect, but I venture to suggest that if lie had from the first strenuously urged the construction of the railway, then our wants would have been attended to long ere this. If we acquit him in this matter he still has to face the charge that the Native land in the district is in a most unsatisfactory condition. He is the Minister in charge of this most important branch of the administration, and lie may f airly be asked how much he has done and left undone for us. The fact is that the settler cannot take up Native land. If he wishes to get a Native block he must be “in with he Natives” in some way. He has heavy expenses to pay at every turn, and the result is that only the rich can settle on Native land.. This shouPd not be. Every settler who wants land should be able to get it with ease and certainty. Until something is done to bring about tli:,s happy result the district will lag behind with a great part of its land practically useless and unproductive. We cannot blind our eyes to these facts, and also to the fact that the Native Minister has not shown that strenuous interest in his constituency which it is necessary for a member of Parliament to exhibit if lie is really to be of practical .use. When we come to think of !,t we have got- very little out of the Government in exchange for being so faithful to their nominee. It has not been a good bargain for us. We have heen ucglected in u manner that can only he called shameful, and simply because we have done as we have been told and returned a Government member. It is useless for the Native Minister to say on tlio eve ox an eleetion what he means to do for us. He has had golden opportunities: to do groat things, but he has net made use of them. .Again I say that so long as we remain subservient so Tong will our district be*neglected.—l am, etc., “VOTER.” ' Gisborne, Nov. 4.