MAJOR ATKINSON.

Patea Mail, 3 October 1881, Page 3

MAJOR ATKINSON.

Thk member for Egmont is expected to reach Patea in a . few days. His visit will be welcome ; and it is to be hoped that if he “ opens the ball ” with a public meeting at this place, he will be listened to with proper respect and consideration. He will find much dissatisfaction, which may or may not seem to him undeserved. If he can explain it away, well and good : there are always two sides to a question. This journal maintains towards Major Atkinson an attitude which is by this time well understood. Our criticisirns are intended to be friendly and independent. He is member for the district, and as such has to represent various interests which are at times not in harmony. Much should be allowed on that ground. But there are general complaints which, while still preferred in a friendly spirit, will have to be pressed against him with proper force. Major Atkinson has had this Native difficulty urged on him so often, while in office and out, besides his assurances and professions not being justified by events, that he will now be regarded by independent voters in the district as,the one man who failed to support Mr Bryce at the right time, and therefore as the one Minister who is responsible for this renewed difficulty. If .he had stood by Mr Bryce in that Ministerial crisis, the Native difficulty would have been long since crushed and probably annihilated. Instead of that, the old indecision was allowed to prevail; and now Major Atkinson sees another Native rebellion brooding and all-but broken out at Parihaka, and he sees himself obliged to ask for a hundred thousand pounds as an extra vote for covering his own mistake. If we could place his conduct in a more favorable light, it would be a relief to be able to do so; but so far as we can judge; it seems to us a duty to state this failure as a grievous instance of misplaced confidence. The peace and prosperity of this district arc of more concern than the political favor of any Minister. Partisans may think otherwise, but that is their affair.

The manner in which the Now Plymouth Harbor Bill was engineered only to be dropped is a serious dereliction of duty to the great majority of Egmont electors. Of this, more has to be said. There is also an apparent insincerity in the manner of dallying with the question of a railway route, which straightforward

people do not' like. It may lie a mere suspicion, but being so prevalent we think it should be m-utiyued, in order that Major Atkinson may know why his friends here are complaining. The Patea Harbor Endowment Bill had a peculiar history which needs explaining.

Major Atkinson has managed the colonial finances with admirable ability, and as a colonial politician lie stands well. Apparently the people on this Coast are thought to be narrow-minded when matters of domestic urgency, like a Native rebellion—a harbor rate in perpetuity for no benefit—a railway route which will affect our daily interests more closely than questions of general politics—arc pressed on our member as being legitimate grounds for complaint. There are members in the country who can promote local interests with judicious energy, while making a fair figure as colonial politicians. It is Major Atkinson’s misfortune that his district is not free from conflicting interests. When one end is sacrificed to the other in a manner which speaks fpr itself, that one end will and ought to cry out.