Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE : SATURDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1883.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1365, 6 October 1883, Page 2

Poverty Bay Standard. PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY AND SATURDAY MORNINGS. GISBORNE : SATURDAY, OCTOBER 6, 1883.

Some time ago the Cook County Council, thinking it probable that Government might bo induced, providing a little influence was brought to bear upon the subject, to make the I district a present of a few tons of t railway rails, decided to ask the cooperation of several gentlemen whose interest in the place is only second to their zeal in all things appertaining to their own pockets. Accordingly the Clerk was instructed to write and beg the powerful aid of our member—Mr Allan M* Donald, Sir George Whitmore and Mr DeLautour. It might reasonably be hoped that these talismanic names would have had the desired effect of, in at least obtaining some rails at a moderately low price. The result of the combined action of our Horath and his two noble brothers, is that the ’County Council has received a communication from the Secretary of tho RailwayDepartment advising them that the Government is prepared to supply them with discarded rails “ suitable for a horse tramwav,” at tho rate of £4 10s per ton. The extent of their generosity be more apparent when we inform our readers that they were selling these rails last year in

Auckland at the rate of £3 5s per ton. This appears to bo the general effect of that “influence” which has of late been so lavishly exercised on behalf of “ this district.” We cannot help thinking that, had the matter . been represented to the authorities without any “ influence” having been brought to bear upon the ques° tion, we should at least have been place! on as good a footing as the Aucklanders. At the rate of £1 10s per ton it would cost the County somewhere about £3OO per mile for rails alone. We understand that, to replace the ones which are worn out and to extend the line to the required length at the other end, it would require upwards of five miles of fresh rails. We have it from the most reliable authority that, to obtain stone from the Patutahi quarry will involve an outlay of somewhere between £20,000 and £25.000 at the lowest computation. In the next place the metal would cost us fully 12s 6d per yard, or more than trebble the cost of the last metalling contract. This would be the nearest approach to “ paving the streets with gold” wo have ever heard ( We cannot help thinking but what the immense outlay required for the construction of a ' road, and also the enormous cost of ’ working it presents almost insuperable ( obstacles to the opening up of the Patutahi quarry. The question is undoubtedly a most serious one, aud requires every consideration before a ] final decision is arrived at. j

A case of especial importance to this district came before our Resident Magistrate’s Court yesterday. We refer to the action of J. D. Ormond v. Haiona Mokena and Hopera Kiwi, in which the plaintiff sought to recover the sum af £25, which had [been paid to the defendants as a consideration for assigning her share in a certain block of land. At the time the money was paid to this woman it was supposed that she was , single, but when the deed to which she had affixed her signature, was produced in the Native Lands Court for the purpose of subdividing the block, it was found that the woman was married, and her husband refused to ratify his wife’s contract. The result was that, this woman’s share was cut out of the block. The husband also acknowledged that he had received £lO of the money. It appeared also from the evidence of several witnesses in the case that the Judge of the Lauds Court had expressed a very decided opinion as to the conduct of the Native defendant in this case, and also as to the propriety and justice of refunding the £25 received. In spite of the apparent simplicity of the case, it took the whole of the forenoon to get through it, on account of a number of “far fetched hypothesis ” being imported into the case, together with an immense amount of noisy verbiage. One of the counsel in the case aleo laid much stress upon the honesty of the Natives as shown by their dealings in the Native Lands Court. Whatever might have been the reasons for calling attention to these facts, we do not know, but they could have no other effect than that of showing up more clearly the want of principle on the part of his client in this transaction. Whatever may be the lavr in this case we know not, but as far as justice and equity is concerned the matter is most simple.