HOKITIKA.

Kumara Times, Issue 2863, 5 December 1885, Page 2

HOKITIKA.

[from oue own coeeespondent.] December 4, My valuable services have been-se-cured by the proprietor of this widelycirculated journal, and, under the terras of agreement, I am to forward to him “occasionally”—(a useful word signifying “weekly,” “bi-weekly,” “monthly,” “yearly,” or any convenient period whatsoever) —a column or so of Hokitika news. If there is no news (a very common occurrence) to send, I am to make reflections —not on men, but on things in general; and to give my views on any subject under the sun. The reran aeration I am to receive is a matter between Mr Janiou and myself—it is sufficient for the general public to know that my terms are most enormous, and that they have been very cheerfully agreed to by the great “ we” of Kumara. As to my identity, that is a question neither here nor there. It will be as difficult to say who I am, as it is to this day to fix the authorship of the letters of Junius. There are some things new enough to be seen in Revell street just now. Mr James Clarke, as County Chairman, is new ; Mr John Tait, as the coming Mayor, is new; and two “Captains” of the Salvation Army, looking extremely like two tape-men from a draper’s shop, are exceedingly new. The new County Chairman, I believe, does not care two pence about the high honour that has been conferred upon him. He has merely tried on the clothes, to see how they would fit, and how he would look and feel in them. He will wear the garments fora month or two. Then he will disrobe himself; and if there is not another election of County Chairman before February next, I am—l am, sir, your most obedient servant.

But John Tair, Mayor elect, is new. Mr James Holmes, of Kumara, elected Mr Tait, Mr Holmes is a host in himself in election contests, and his support almost invariably means victory. He works for his man. At the recent Mayoral election he stayed in Hokitika daring the day, arid before 10 a.m. he had already brought forty voters, in Mr Tait’s favour, to the poll. Had Mr Holmes gone home the evening before the election, Mr Michel would have headed the poll, without a shadow of a doubt. So you see what I mean when I say that Mr Holmes elected Mr Tair. The battle was fought in the most good-humoured way, and in the kindliest possible spirit. John Tait is veiy proud, and Mr Michel is not displeased with the respectable position which he occupied. Just before the close of the poll I heard Mr Michel offer to send one of his cabs to bring some of Mr Taib’s supporters to vote, as there was not time for the said voters to teach the Town Hal! before the closing bom ! Mr Michel rose one hundred per cent, in mv estimation after that, If Mr Tait will have little to sav about I tile things; nothing at all to siy about trifles; and not 100 much to say ou

subjects of importance: be will make a very good and useful Mayor. He is a thoroughly honest and straight man. His one great fault is, that he sees almost everything as it would he presented to his view through a camera ohscura. , „ . u Should I say a word at all about the Salvation Army, after advising Mr Tait to say nothing about trifles I Yet the Salvation Army, although it trifles in the most profane way with sacred names and things, is no trifle ! It is, on the contrary, a huge humbug—a delusion, a scare, a mania, on a gigantic scale. It is not surprising to find men like sickly drapers’ assistants ‘ lushing in where angals fear to tread calling themselves “ Captains,” and indulging in the most grotesque military buffoonery. What does really astonish me is to find old and staid and sensible men like Mr D. W. Virtue —men who have almost lived their term on this earth ; men of deportment and dignity, and with the experience of a long life upon them—it is, I say, surprising to find men like these, and such as these, acting as right-hand supporters to the poor, weak tape-men, as aforesaid , and countenancing the issue of Wai Cries” and placards about “knee drill,” “ marching on the foe,’ “bombarding the town,” and countless other idiotic ravings, disgusting and horrible. Let them rave ! The Charitable Aid Board are m the throes of a great difficulty. The County Council are practically unrepresented on the Board. The Boaid consists of representatives of boroughs in the proportion of three to one. Yet the Board, apparently, are endeavouring to get it demonstrated that the practically unrepresented County should find the greater part nf the money for charitable aid. They have, a difficult task, no matter how you look at it; and I commisserate them. Of course their burning wish and desire is to let the boroughs escape by paying as little as possible. They say, “ Look at these poor boroughs! they cant afford to pay j and look at the large revenue of the County.” But these pitying men seem to forget that they are placed where they are, not to pity boroughs, but simply to perform an arithmetical operation, with strict justice and accuracy. If the County revenue is large, the County has real work to do with it—the County Council is a board of Works, having real work to do; whereas I find, the Ross Borough lor instance, during the half year ended 30th September last, spent ,£3OO on works, and £7OO on—on matters that were not works. Anyhow this is an aspect of the case that is not to be considered. The problem to be solved is a simple one, as follows : Given : the clause of the Charitable Aid Act fixing the basis on which contributions are to be levied, viz:— (Clause 23.) “ Contributions from each of such local authorities shall be proportioned to the rateable value of the rateable property, as defined in * The Rating Act, 1876,’ or ‘The Rating Act, 1882,’ in the district or subdivision represented by each local authority respectively, as may be provided by resolution of the Board made under the powers herein contained,” And given, also, the rateable values of the rateable property in the County and the Boroughs, as follows : Rateable Value. Hokitika Borough Council... £94,358 Ross „ j? ••• 27,000 Knmara. „ ~ ... 31,000 Total, three Boroughs ... £152,358 Westland County £132,189 Given these, I say—the question is, to find the proportion each local body has to pay. Simple enough, anyhow !