The Daily News. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1903. THE HARBOUR CONTROVERSY.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 216, 8 October 1903, Page 2

The Daily News. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1903. THE HARBOUR CONTROVERSY.

The paragraph which we quoted from the Hawera Star regarding the New Plymouth and the iron sand question throws an iuterf sting side-ligh , on the harbour extension question. It makerit quite clear that those opposed to the Bill promoted by the Harbour Board are not after all opposed io the extension of the harbour, and are even pre pared to assist in finding the money i! satisfied there is any real need for the extension. At least that is the only reasonable construction to put on the following, which we clip from Tuesday evening's Star. Our contemporary says:—"Replying to a remirk in the Star that wherever the iron wotks ate established harbour facilities may bt depended upon, the Taranaki New.* says: *'Thi-t is, of course, true, but what benefit will the iron industry be to Taranaki if the works are established at Parapara, because of the uncertainty of harbour improvements at the New Plymouth breakwater." Our point is that there is no certainty that the iron works would be established at New Plymouth if the Harbour Bill pissed to morrow, but that, on the other hand, if the iron works were es'ablished or commenced, the harbour accommodation would necessarily follow, The iron woiks promoters have no special love for New Plymouth. They will only go there if they think they can do better than at Parapara. If they will definitely show that they mean business, instead of indulging io mere talk, as heretofore, that will change th>' aspect of matters, but it is not good enough to incur a liability for harbour works on the chance of securing an industry which may never be established, or if established may be located at Parapara or somewher-j else for reasons into which harbour accommodation does not enter." Had the above paragraph appeared in soma of the pipers published in Taranaki we could have understood it, but the Star is usually so well informed and fair that we are surprised to find it making statements which are ungenerous, untrue, and misleading. Ij'it ustakoourcoutem porary's statements in detail. He sayw, " Our point is that theie is no certainty that the iron works would be established at New Plymouth if tht Harbour Bill were pissed to-morrow, b»t that, on the other hand, if the iron works were established, or commenced thb harbour accommodation would necessarily follow." V hen kSir A.J. OadmaD, then Mr Oadman, was in New Plymouth, btiore ho went Home last time, he stated that those with whom he was treating were very anxious regarding harbour facilities, and be asked the B arbour Board to give him some idea as to the prospects of improved facilities being provided, but the B >? rd had to admit that they had no power to make any promise, but had no doubt if the Company started they wou'd be able to do something. being rather vague, seeing that the Iroesand Company were proposing to epsnd several hundred thousand pounds, Mr 'Vlrnnn made a proposal to le?,se the humour and make bin own improvement*, but the Board

declined this, and said, in the event of thy Company star ing, an cIT »rb would be made to get. the authority of the ratepayers to sanction the extension ot the harbour. Until tha Harbour Bill iB passed the Bosrd has absolutely no power to take a vote of the ratepayers on harbour extension, and in view of the opposition to the Board, not being given the pjwer to borrow, bat merely to obtain powor to take a vote on tha question, it is absurd to say " harbour ac ommolation would necessarily follow," Then tha Star says: —" The ircnsand promoters have no love for New Plymouth ; they will only go thero if they think they can do better than at Par&para." It would ba very interesting to know on what ground the Star has the audacity to make such a false statement as th's. As far gs Sir Alfred Cadman is concerned hs has shown every desire to establish ?ha works at New Plymouth, and b-s evan as we have said offered to take the harbour over to help to secure the erection of the works here. On Mr Berry and Mr Smith, M.H.R., tha o'her two promoter?, the statement is a groBS libel, New Plymouth is theii hom", ind practically all they possess and r,U their interests are in Now P.ymouth. Both gentleman have for miny j*eirs, in every possible way, forwarded the interests of the town and now to be told thay have no love for New Plymouth, is a proof of the lengths thosa opposed to the harbour will go in their efforts to prevent its improvement. The statement about " indulging in mere talk as heretofore" may bs treated in the manner such a wilful untruth deserves. Messrs Oadman, Berry, and Smith have already spent several thousand pounds in endeavouring to establish an industry which will be of incalculable bancfit, not only to Taranaki, but to the whole colony, and this is called indulging in mere talk. The Star further says: "It is not good enough tQ incur a liability for harbour works on a chance of securing an industry which may never be established, or if established may be located at Parapara or somewhere else for reasons into which harbour accommodation does not enter." We would ask : who asks anyone to incur any liability on chance. All that has been done so far is to introduce a Bill into Parliament to enable the Harbour Board whan over it thinks it wise to do so, either to increase the facilities for general trade, or should additional facilities be required for the ironsand industry, to r.aka a vote of the ratepayers as to whether they will empower the Board to borrow ihe money for extension or not. Tho passing of the Bill imposes , lj liability whatever, but those whom Gi>e Mar is supporting are under the imprewion that the ratepayers of the Harbour District have not enough c mmon ser.se to look hfter own their interest, and whether the ratepayers wmt to have a voice in the <uanigemeut of their own affirs or not, oot to let them do so. " Trust the oeaple" i 3 an unknown principle with chem. The people, in their idea, are inly a common herd who have to be told how and when to vote. In fr.ct, as far as possible they ara determined to deprive the settlers of the franchise the Bill proposes to confer on them As regards the question of harbour accommodation cot affecting the locality ot' the worke, Sir A. J. Oadman hap over and ov»r again emphasised the importance cf harbour facilities. At Pitrapira harbour facilities can b« provided at a certain cost, some .£130,000 '.o ,£140,000, but the absence cf railway communication is a drawback, and i must ba seen that if the d. g in >. manger attitude adop'ed by the opponents of the harbour cf no"; doing anything themselves, and refusing t > oand the harbour over to those wh?> will, the prospects of the works bairn. ;:s ablished here are very rem.re. We say, and wo say it with a due sense of the r; sporisibility of our statement, that the prospects of the Board being ahl? to hold out some hope of some improvements in the harbour facilities will have an important bearing on the site of the iron works; those who deny this must takti tha responsibility of doing 00,