South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, AUGUST 6, 1881.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2614, 6 August 1881, Page 2

South Canterbury Times, SATURDAY, AUGUST 6, 1881.

SECOND EDITION

A round dozen of Harbor Endowment Bills are now before the Legisla-, ture. There are doubtless more to follow. It would bo idle to deny that the favorable reception accorded to Mr Turnbull’s Bill has called forth the others. The Gisborne Harbor Bill, which passed its second reading late on Thursday night, will no doubt also have a spurring effect. The titles of the dozen Bills, by this time on the Order Paper, have not reached us, but doubtless the majority of them are of an impracticable nature. That much cannot be said of the Gisborne Harbor Bill. For a distance of close on live hundred miles —from Wellington to the Bay of PJenty—there is not a fairly’ good harbor on the East Coast of the North Island. It is needless to mention the fertility of Poverty Bay. There is no district in the North'lsland with better resources. The population already settled there is considerable, and the faith of the settlers of the district in its permanent prosperity is shown by the high value of* the lands. Now, Gisborne so far has not received any benefit from the Public Works expenditure. There is not a single mile of railway in the district, and the settlers are now as much isolated from the rest of the colony as on the first day they landed in Poverty Bay. The claims of the district for an endowment for harbor improvement have been brought before Parliament on more than one occasion, and although the justice and advisability of the colony affording substantial help were recognised on all hands, the member for the East Coast was unable to bring sufficient political pressure to bear to force an Endowment Bill through Parliament. Gisborne is in the Auckland provincial district, hut there is no community of interest between the districts round the Waitemata and the Poverty Bay district. The member for the East Coast has hitherto stood alone in the Legislature when he asked for a moiety -of the Public Works expenditure, or an equivalent in the shape of a land endowment. Gisborne has many natural advantages for the formation of a harbor, and Sir John Coode has reported on the practicability ol carrying out the work at a moderate cost. The reason we have alluded at such length to the Gisborne Harbor Endowment Bill is to show that its passage through the Lower House will not necessarily endanger the safety of Mr Turnbull’s measure, the progress of which the people of this district are anxiously watching. The Timaru Bill is not in bad company. Few measures of a more bona fide, beneficial, and practicable nature than the Gisborne Endownment Bill have been introduced into the Legislature.

'Recent divisions lead to the conclusion that the Timaru Harbor Board Bill will in 'all probabifity pass the House of Representatives, How will it fare in the Council ? Of late years the Upper House has treated Endowment Bills with scant courtesy. But then they were mostly “ grabbing ” measures impracticable schemes merely to obtain expenditure on local works. That was the sum total of the benefits to be derived. It is no wonder that the Council has heretofore set its face against such Bills, for its members have no enraged constituencies to dread. It has been the boast of the admirers of that body that hitherto it has displayed a truer colonial spirit than the Lower Chamber. It has most undoubtedly been less influenced by local considerations. The Council is in the position of being able to consider each Bill on its merits, untrammelled by the pressure of the electorates. A general election has no dread for the members of the Upper House. There is no occasion for them to reject a Bill the passing of which would be beneficial not only to a particular district, but to the whole colony, simply for the purpose of affording an excuse for rejecting less worthy measures. It should be apparent to any man of ordinary intelligence that the claims of Timaru for aid for harbor works are not to be classed with those of any other place in the colony. The return of exports and imports show conclusively that this port already possesses*an extensive trade. During last July the most violent gales with heavy seas which had been experienced for years prevailed, and the loading and unloading of vessels were in consequence greatly interfered with, yet during the month twenty-one vessels had entered at the Customs, and the revenue derived by the Harbor Board amounted to £750, the net profit being £3-16 17s 4d. That, surely, is a substantial proof that as a port Timaru is well patronised. If any other place in the colony can show such results, the argument will be overwhelming in favor of that place obtaining a land endowment. In a previous issue we urged that each case should be considered on its merits; We are glad to notice that Mr McLean advocates the same course, Mr Hall and Mr Rolleston have taken the narrowest possible view of the Timaru Harbor Board Endowment Bill. They did not object to the measure on its own merits, but they feared the House—and Ministers in particular—would be troubled by other places asking for endowments. That was an exceedingly weak and childish argument. So long as Parliament deals ‘with public works expenditure, the House must decide in what direction it is desirable that the money should be expended. Surely no one will deny that the formation of a harbor as an outlet for such a district as South Canterbury is a subject which might well engage the

attention of the Legislature, and that it stands in the front rank of public works ? Mr Rolleston is reported to hare said that if the Lower House did not strangle each and all Endowment Bills, they would be strangled in “ another place.” That is the term which one branch of the Legislature applies to the other. However, Mr Rolleston may be out in his reckoning. The members of the Legislative Council are more independent than, the members of the Government. No doubt the Attorney-General will work as hard in the Council to defeat the measure as his colleagues did in the House of Representatives. It is to be hoped that he will be equally unsuccessful. A drawback is that this district is unrepresented in the Legislative Council. We know of no member likely to take a personal interest in the measure. All we can hope for is that Legislative Councillors will approach the consideration of the Bill without prejudice, and that its merits will be,amply discussed, and that they will be uninfluenced by anything else which may be brought before Parliament. When the other Endowment Bills reach the “ Lords ” they too can be discussed on their merits.