The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1879.

Patea Mail, Volume IV, Issue 398, 8 February 1879, Page 2

The Patea Mail. (Published Wednesdays and Saturdays.) SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 1879.

The Wanganui Herald of Tuesday last, after quoting the paragraph which appeared in our Saturday’s issue, as to the rumoured discontinuance of the regular running of the s.s. Clyde, says—- “ If this paragraph has been written in good faith it is only necessary to state that the owners of the Clyde have no intention of taking her off the trade. If, however, and there is pretty good evidence in support of the theory, the paragraph was inserted wilfully to mislead the settlors in the Patea District, then we must express surprise at such tactics being adopted. It is customary to speak well of the bridge that carries you safely over, but the Patea Mail evidently thinks fit to pander to local influence by disseminating a statement wholly without foundation. If the Mail were honest it would, while encouraging the locally owned boat in every legitimate way, refrain from giving false information respecting a rival. Will the Mail try and understand the meaning of fair play ?” , r n another part of tho same issno our oatemporary has a lengthy and graphic

account of the adventures of the s.sClyde in passing from the Patea Itivcr to the briny ocean—how she struck on the stones at the end of the breakwater, gut swung round, and then beached— Jiotv t3ie engines wore pet first this way then that way, and what might have happened, but what did not happen—how the powerful ? little tub was swinging as it were on a pivot in the water, with the earth beneath and the canopy of heaven above—how she hung for a time by the stern, then backed forward, and away again in search of the sides instead of keeping to the centre of the channel how she successfully dug her nose into the spit, and was lifted by the waves of the ocean into the deeper water where three several bumps were bumped, and the seas broke over Iter, and how at last she found the sea, and made the run, after all the dangers and delays, from wharf to wharf in 41 hours. Anti the whole account was furnished by a passenger, who further said, “it will be madness to try to send the new boat Patoa to Patea until the bar shifts.” Wc think the informant might have gone further and have told how, after the stones had boon struck, all hands even to the cook were called to “ man the pumps,” and finding 1 no suction, concluded the bottom was dry—and how after passing the perils of the bar, and being wotted by the seas, they had to go down one by one into the spacious fo’castlo to put on their other boots and socks.

As to the information contained in the paragraph complained of, we may say it was told and received in perfect good faith, and that it came from a quarter whence nothing disparaging to Wanganui would ever be likely to emanate —the “ pretty good evidence” that “ the paragraph was inserted wilfully to mislead the settlers in the Patea District,” notwithstanding. Prom this we can judge of what our contemporary deems “ pretty good evidence.” We did not understand that the running of the Clyde would be wdiolly discontinued, nor did we say so, simply that the last of the regular trips had been run, and that cargo for Patea having been worked up, the boat could not again come till inducement offered. Outward freights being reserved for the new steamer had led to the Clyde a time or two returning to Wanganui with very little cargo, which of course the Wanganui owners have not relished. The Patea Mail has not “seen fit to pander to local influence by disseminating a statement wholly without foundation,” nor is it requisite or inclined to do so. The Patea Mail quoted with approval a paragraph from the Wanganui Herald, setting forth that the Directors of tiie Patea S. S. Co. had agreed that, shareholder’s freight should he charged only at the rate of 80s per ton, whilst uou-sharcholdors would he charged 40s. In quoting the paragraph we stated that “ The arrangement has been unfavorably commented on in Patea, ’and unless altered, the Company will likely enough find out that they have made a mistake.” Shareholders, whose imports are about nil, are equally dissatisfied with nonshareholders, and desire to know what profits arc likely to accrue to thorn for capital invested if the largo importing shareholders are allowed to pocket 10s per ton on freight, before their (the investing) shareholders turn comes. The “ local influence” which our Wanganui contemporaries assert one of the other they arc compelled to pander to. for very existence, is unfelt here—'.at any rate did not prevent the Patea Mail giving publicity to what was known would by some of the Directors of the Patea S. S. Co. bo deemed an offence. “ Ifthe Mail were honest” where wc should like to know can our contemporary point out the remotest approach to roguery, in connection with this or any other matter, public or private. “ The pretty good evidence” which would bo deemed by the Herald sufficient justification for it to call into question the honesty of such as have, fortunately, not been trained in Wanganui ways, and have not been subjected to Wanganui influence, would not bo doomed by us sufficiently good grounds for imputing roguery, or for charging any person or pa per with spreading “false information.” The readiness to impute motives may be taken as an index of the commercial morality and of the surroundings of papers which assert of each other, as is the case at Wanganui, the necessity they are under to “ pander to local influence,” and to those who support them. “Will the Mail try and understand the meaning of fair play ?” Will our contemporary tell us if it may be deemed fair play for Wanganui to have obtained through local pressure £3,000 for its Main County Road two sessions ago—promptly paid (doubtless through the influence of the friend at Court) and spent —whilst Patea (through the exertions of Major Atkinson who knew money was much needed)voted unequal sum same time should oven yet bo unable to get a promise of the cash? Is it fair play that Wanganui should seek Patea lands as endowments for its Borough, or that nothing less than the cream of Momahaki land should satisfy it as an endowment for its High School ? Is it fair that such liberal endowments should be granted to Wanganui, of land in other Counties, for Harbor purposes, whilst Patea could hardly get permission to borrow money to carry on with ? Is it fair that the “ professed” friend of Patea, once if not now of the Herald firm, a Cabinet Minister, should be found voting against the Patea Harbor Bill ?—Wanganui should,while in every legitimate way advancing its own interests, refrain from injuring a neighbor it has so long and freely bled. —Is it fair that because one of Wanganui’s interested and interesting men should be anxious to work cut forest off his hands, that trip after trip, transshipped cargo and especially needed material should bo hold back, and works at Patea be brought to a stand still ? More in this direction can be furnished

if required.—ls it fair that Wanganui should be allowed to bounce Patea out of the use of gravel pits within its own boundaries, opened at the expense Patea County, because Wanganui, after its accnstomoJ numner, piv/ers ho filch or sponge rather than pay the cost of opening good gravel beds known to exist at, convenient places within its own borders ? If our contemporary will try to make ns understand where the fair play is shown in any of the above queries, wo will furnish ■ yet another list. As to the river entrance, now in a transitional state, and being gradually 'worked as the .Breakwater progresses to the desired point, we are content to “bide a wool.” Useful work is being done and good results will follow. We arc fully aware of the trouble Wanganui has lately been in as to the awkwardness of its river for navigation. We do not gloat over its misfortunes, nor do we invent detrimental sensational stories or “pander to local influence.”