THE ENDOWMENT QUESTION.

Manawatu Herald, Volume I, Issue 93, 22 July 1879, Page 2

THE ENDOWMENT QUESTION.

We would again press upon the Foxion Harbour Board the necessity of obtaining data to accompany the request for an endowment. A meeting of the Hoard will be held towards the end of the tuonth, when doubtless a resolution will be passed, asking foi a gift of land. f ihe fate of this can easily be anticipated. A courteous answer will doubtless be returned, to the effect that the Government are un« able to grant the request, not having the power. The first questions that will be asked are, what do you want to do with an endowment? how do you propose to spend your funds'? what does your river need? To answer, this, a report of some kind is needed. Mr Ballance told the local deputation plainly that the reason the Foxton endowment was thrown out, was because no data what* ever was furnished, showing the necessity for an endowment. To repeat the same performance would be to make both the Board and the township look ridiculous. The question of the endowment of harbours is certain to come up again this session. Last year Parliament set its face against all endowments, for the reason that almost evary " mud-creek " in the Colony had sent in a claim, but foolish applications are not likely to prevent real cases of necessity being attended to. What we desire is that the application to be made by .M anawatu shall not risk defeat through being indefinite and vague. A survey should be made at an early date, or a memorandum drawn up by the captains constantly trading to and, from this port, embodying recommendations of works actually required to improve the river for navigation. Whilst we are proud of our river, we think there is room for improvement. A vary strong case might be made out. We have the best harbour on the west ooast between Kawhia and Wellington. Foxton is now a Customs port. Its trade is constantly growing. These facts point to the necessity of the harbour being still further improved, to do which an endowment is necessary. If through their procrastination or inaction, an unsatisfactory answer is again returned to the Board, we think the verdict of the public will probably be, "culpable negligence."