Reply to Mr Henry.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 3, Issue 180, 20 March 1914, Page 2

Reply to Mr Henry.

[TO THE EDITOR ] Sir,--Before attending to Mr Joseph Henry I have much pleasure in thanking you for the accurate manner in which ycu published my letter in voura of March 3rd i-sr. You published in your Impression of March 10th a letter from Mr Henry, in which he tries to throw dust in tha eyes of those who do not know me by suggesting that I am not to be taken seriously. J would take this opportunity of assuring your readers who take an interest in the economical management of the country that I am in dead earnest when, as I think, £BO,OOO of hardearned money is about to be misspent upon a railway through districts well provided with ways out, and where the 'bus that has run for many years is half empty every day. The few tons of potatoes that Mr Henry mentions and the return mrjiures might certainly pay the gums' and stotionmasters' wages, but for general upkeep and interest the consolidated tund would suffer. Iris money would, in niv opinion, be properly spent on roads and bridges in places where th'.-re are rone. Mr Henry suggests that I should give "my political spectacles an occasional polish." Here he misses the mark inasmuch as I have never yet resorted to the use of spectacles either political or optical, and 1 certainly don't need to do su now to enable me to sec wherein the present Government differ from tbeir compatriots of twe.ity-live years ago (I have never said they didn't differ), or the reason Mr Henry supports the Patumahoe railway. I can sec both with "half an eye"—it does not take I two eyes assisted by spectacles. Mr Henry having changed his glasses (vide turning first 'sod remarks) he must have got a smoked pair. He can eviden'.ly only see the Waiuku railway through them. He not only changed his spectacles, but he changed his cost. Perhaps be fired that coat of many colours "for a time" from his great historical name-sake. This coat being ot Jewish make I should not have thought it wculd have suited him. Regarding Mr Henry's bald statement that the present Government n true Liberal "lecausc it giv i equal opportunities to all": Why did Mr Henry not give us just a little evidence id support of this? Why? Because he hasn't any, so I have no trouble in knocking it to bits. Take the railways. We understand there are 12,000 employed on them, must of whom would like to be manager. Did this opportunity-to-all-Uovernment give them a fair show? Not at all; they brought an Englishman all the way from England to fill the post and are giving him £3OOO a year and 25s a day expenses after having had the railways well managed for £I2OO a year. I am English, but, Mr Editor, I must utter my protest against their unwarrantable aclior. Sir J. G. Ward (who, the country admits, was one of the best Ministers the country haa had) stated in the House that there wore at least nine in the service thoroughly capable of the management, and yet this equal-opportunity-Government deliberately deprived them of the show for which they had been training a..d waiting for halt a life time. Then, bow abcut the Riyd Garlrak incident? The Government wanted an exercise instructor. Did they give an opportunity to all? No; (hey "appointed" Mr Garlick, who had no diploma, at £6OO a year. Then they wanted a member for a Land Board and tht*y "appointed" a Mr Simpson, a publican with seven convictions against him. Was this opportunity to all? Bar! Mr Henry is most unhappy in his statement. Why, Mr Edito*. I could h'll your useful paper and bury Joseph—coloured coat, specs aid all —with such an overwhelming weight of evidence to the contrary that he would never find his way out to attend the opening of the Waiuku railway. I may, as says, belon/ to the philosophers,Hbut thank goodness I do not belong to those who change their coats for a road, a bridge, or a railway.—l am, etc , M. J. ROGERS. Pukekohe West, March lib, 1914.