THE Manamatu Herald. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1879. THE RAILWAY QUESTION,

Manawatu Herald, Volume I, Issue 48, 11 February 1879, Page 2

THE Manamatu Herald. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 11, 1879. THE RAILWAY QUESTION,

The cras3 ignorance upon the railway question displayed by the Palmerston organ is most surprising. In another column we reprint the Times' leading article of Saturday, as a specimen of the argument, facts, and antilogy with which lie endcavoura in a mockxhumorous style, to gloze over the weakness of his cause. To witness a writer taking somersaults blindfolded, and landing in unnatural attitudes, is certainly very amusing ; but we cannot help pitying our contemporary that a man of hi3 brilliant parts (?), thorough knowledge of New Zealand geography (?), and deep acquaintance with the principles of logic (?), shouM be forced, because he resides at Palmerston, into a posibion where his very few (?) weak points are made so apparent,and where his dense ignorance of the question stands out so boldly.

. . 't i3 true ; 't is true 't is pity, And pity 't is 't is true. But his flowing, facile pen can so rapidly throw off a column of that l< easy writing " which Sheridan says is such "curst hard reading," that without giving facts or argument, he fills up his three-quarters of a column with anecdotes of a very puerile character, illustrations that are "considerably mixed," and queries that only a " new chum " would think of asking. We present the article to our readers as a literary Irish stew, in which they will doubtless recognise a large proportion of — well, sheep's tongue. A few of the leading " points " may be noticed. Our contemporary says : —

Be (Mr Grower) went into the sublimity of his eloquence about the hundreds of thousands of acres and the millions of pounds represented ; but -would it be believed that all the while this enchflnting panorama was unfolded.it was of that very country through which the line to Fitzherbert is to be brought ? If not, whore is it ?

Now, if our contemporary would spend a few shillings in a map of the country, he would prevent a further exhibition of this kind. The timber country Mr Gower referred to was not Fitzherberb, but Horowhenua and Uhau. Is our contemporary ignorant of the fact that the line of railway is the same to both Palmerston and Foxton through the whole of that country (which is known to be heavily thus bered), until the Faiaka is reached ; there the point of divergence is fixed, — one line goe3 22 miles to Palmerston ; the other 8 miles to Fox ton. The whole question is this. Shall the Government make that 8 miles, and join the present line at its extremity, or shall they make the 221 Mr Gower, as we understand, says that there are hundreds of thousands of acres of splendid land in the district immediately south of Foxton — the Horowhenua — and that this country would utilise the port of Foxton.

Up comes our contemporary iih<l concludes that because he has writt n about- "hundreds of thousands of acres," Mr Gower means his block-. Then follows a t^usliing peuri ot joy, to which a very squeaky anecdote act* as proinde. Dues our contemporary wish to shelter behind the mean subterfuge that the lin^a are the same to the point of divergence ? Would he, then, force Horusvhenua mill, rs to send their timber by tram 6U miles, to Wellington, wh^n they have a port 10 miles away ? Or does he wish to see it travel acrcss the Makurerua Swamp of '28,000 acres through the Fitzherbert block oi 15,000 acres, round by Palmerston, and down to Foxton, making 40 miles ? A short time ago our contemporary said :—" The mental ol^ "h'quity of our Foxton contempoi-. " ary is certainly amusing* forknow- " ing how convenient is its assumed " blindness, We can readily account " for its apparent obtuseness." The sentence is very deep, and we havfi not yet succeeded in piercing its mistiness, but we imagine it means something dreadful, and therefore

apply it to our contemporary in this instance' Ho forgets temporarily the difference between dictation and the expression of an opinion. It is Furprising that one who can split hail's so well is unable to see the glaring distinction* When the Palin erston meeting expressed its "opinion," that a further survey should be made, they did not " dictate " to the Government upon the matter. So in the present instance Mr Gower says quite truly they could not dictate to the Government the route to be adopted, but when the settlers are told that it stands in black and white that Parliament sanctioned the line from Wellington to Foxton, they do not dictate, they do not even ask the Government to start the line there, but sim* ply record their opinion that it is oxceoJingly desirable the work of formal ion should be commenced at the Foxion end. There is no inconsistency in that.

Our contemporary now fights shy of Fitzherbert. Our statement of the land in the block — 15,000 acres — completely floored him. Ho has never questioned it, because ho cannot honestly. He says he " will leave that matter in the hands of the Department."

Oh, what a fall was there, my countrymen ! From ''hundreds of thousands of acres of fertile land, making homes for thousands of settlers," absolutely to "cut" those poor 19 denizens of Fitzherbert in that manner. If that is not imitating a rocket's ascent, and the stick's descent, what is?

The cutting enquiry is made, how much land is there between Paiaka and rfandon for sale % Probably not much. We should like to know: but the land having been sold, and a population of several thousands being resident in the district, which would derive the benefit of the railway, we hold more consideration shoTild be shown them than the Fitzhorbort settlers. Simply to compare the Sandon district alone with the Fitzherbert, how long will ifc be before the lattor can produce one-fiftieth of whai; is now raise j in the former ; and supposing Sandon to progress at the same rate during the noxt decade, ifc will be one of the most flourishing agricultural districts in the country. Upon a rough calculation, its pro* ducts in cereals for this year, will be worth not much less than £20,000, and the amount would be quadrupled if there were any convenient means of getting it out oi the district.

Our contemporary says underhand means have been resorted to. Let him declare them. "We have not sent gentlemen down to badger Ministers, and bring the influence of Wellington tnei chants and lawyers who own Fitzherberb land to bear upon the Go~ vernment. The meetings of last week were straightforward and manly protests against the attempts of Palmers^ ton to rob the South District ; but no underhand dealing cau be shown. The Wanganui petition gives him great concern, and he says Wanganui is uninterested ! We will tell him that Wanganui has a greater claim to be considered than even Feilding. The line to Fitzherbert will confer no direct benefit on Feildiug, bub that to Foxton &t once saves Wanganui 20 miles. Wangs nui uninterested ! We imagine if our contemporary travelled much between Wanganui and tho capital, and found that through the Hue joining at Palmerston every journey cost him 5s 6d extra ; if he were an importer, and found that the extra 22 miles meant a loss of hundreds of pounds each year ; if he will consider the enormous waste of time represented by the journey being H hours longer in duration, he would see that Wanganui, — aye, and Patca, Taranaki, and even Auckland, — aro deeply interested in the movenifnt to obtain the junction at Foxton. If any fur* thor proof is needed ..of the utter break down of our contemporary's caso, we ask our readers to peruse the article in question, and they will con - elude, with us, that it evidences the vain attetnp*. of a writer to hold to a position he is forced -to maintain, bub which has no foundation other than shifting sand.