CORRESPONDENCE.

Hokitika Guardian, 17 April 1925, Page 1

CORRESPONDENCE.

NOMENCLATURE,

(To the Editor)

Sir,—Noticing an Editorial in your Paper of the 7th. inst., commenting on the proposed township at Lake Kanieri, I would he very much obliged if you would grant me space in your columns to draw the attention of the residents of Hokitika and others that may be interested in the County of Westland, to the name of the proposed town.

The name, according to your editorial, suggested for the new township, is to he “Ruareka”. Now the meaning of this word is “.Sweet Hole” or “Sweet Hit” which, I feel sure, and I am certain others will agree with me, is hardly lit- for any town in such a beautiful locality as Lake Kaniori. liy a stretch of imagination, one could call it a hole, as the Lake is nearly surrounded by hills, hut, I contend,, that for a spot so perfect in beauty, a more suitable name could he found for a town that would he in such close proximity to the. Lake and that would have a large couiicetiuii with the Lake from a visitor’s point of view. i understand that many tourists visit the Lake and 1 am sure that the majority of them ask what “Kanieri” means and, if the town eventuates, they will ask what its name means. J know of numerous instances where tour-

ists and visitors to various places of interest have asked what is the meaning of the Maori names, and I am sure that they will agree with me when they are told the meaning of “Ruareka.” I would suggest Sir, that the town bo called “Awareka” which means “Sweet Yale’’ or “Sweet Valley”, and it has not the hard sound that “Ruareka” has when pronounced, which, I Junk, is not in keeping with the tender .len.uty of the .Lake.

Thanking you for your kindness in (lowing me space,

T am etc., A STUDENT OF .MAORI Hokitika 15th., April, 102.5.

REPRESENTATIVE MLSREPRI I SENTATfON.

(To the Editor.)

Sir, —Now that Mr \V. Grounds, the Chairman of the Daily Hoard has endorsed the proposal for the adoption of the “ Ward system ” for the election of the members of the hoard in place of the present “ Island system,” as it may be called, the change in all probability will lie made. Hut the existing system is so flagrantly undemocratic and so shockingly inequitable everyone wishing to see the dairy farmers properly represented on the hoard should join in the demand that the change shall he made at the earliest possible, moment. What Parliament was about when it allowed the possibility of such a reactionary system of electing a so-called “ representative body ” being foisted upon the eo>intry to creep into the Dairy Control Act T cannot imagine: lint no good purpose would lie served liv heaping reproaches upon its inadvertent head at the present juncture. One may he permitted to wonder, however. if it would have accepted with equal complacency a proposal from the -Minister of Agriculture to elect the House of Representatives by a single constituency with each elector entitled to exercise seventy-six votes. In principle such an arrangcuicul as this would ha i o hot' 11 no more oulragoux than was tin- giving of six votes (o each factory supplier in the North Island and three to each supplier in the South Island at the election of (he members of the Dairy Hoard. At the last Parliamentary election under such a system the Relormers. though polling; approximately only 12 per cent of tin- votes cast, would have secured the whole of the seats in the Mouse, while the Liberals, Labourites and • I ndepedonents with 58 per cent, of (ho votes, would not. have returned a, single representative. At the election of (lie members of the Dairy Hoard the issues were not confused by the presence of lour parties in the field, lmt everyone, with the exception of the most simple of the laetory suppliers, realised that the pernicious system of voting handed over the constitution pf the Hoard, so far as the North Island was concerned, to the big and well organised battalions in the *W aikoto district. Roughly there were 10,000 suppliers in the Auckland province entitled to vote, 8,000 in Taranaki and 10,000 in Wellington and Hawke’s Bay. Fvcryone acquainted with the. Incts saw that the contest was over before it was begun. The system of election permitted of no other result. The out-and-out conlrolists had their forces disciplined from one end of the island to the other; they chose their ticket wiseIv and their carried it intact.

This was inevitable from the first, and there is no need to impute improper motives to the “big fellows in the Waikato who worked this pretty little coup with the utmost skill and ingenuity. It is the duty ol the Government, however, to see that this sort of thing does not happen Of the 37,000 odd suppliers in the North Island only some 22.5 per cent recorded their votes, and of the 19,000 odd in the South Island only some 19.•) per cent. That is not popular election. Mr Grounds and his friends say that a bigger poll would have given them a larger majority. 1 am not in a position to refute their contention, and they are not in a position to prove it. But it really has no bearing on the point at issue. What is wanted is an equitable system of election which will give every voter as nearly as possible the measure of representation to which he is entitled. Personally I should prefer to go a good deal further in this direction than it is now proposed to go, hut the “ Ward system.” at least will repair the more glaring defects of the system liv which the present board was elected. I am. etc..

FAIR REPRESENTATION Wellington. April 15.