WEST COAST LEASES.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVII, Issue 163, 16 December 1914, Page 3

WEST COAST LEASES.

To the Editor. Sir, —In your issue of Thursday, December 10th, appears a letter signed "Paul Willcox," in which the writer endeavors to show that Mr. Astbury would make a superior representative to Mr. Wilkinson. This requires no comment, as Mr. Wilkinson's majority of 850 on the day that this letter appeared in print is a clear indication that the lEgmont electors are quite satisfied with their member, although Mr. Willcox does contend that Mr. Astbury "will be attached to a great deal more honest, and more capable party." Mr. Willcox then proceeds in rather an obscure way to re--1 late what has happened in connection with the West Coast leases. Surely this subject lias been fairly well discussed, and might be allowed to remain as it is, seeing that the leaseholders are, with the exception of a few like Mr. Willcox, well satisfied with what has been done for them. Mr. Willcox says Mr. Maxwell is the man to whom the leaseholders are beholden much more than to the member. It is admitted, I believe, that every leaseholder is more than satisfied with what Mr. Maxwell lias done for them, and they were prepared to give a substantial recognition of these services out of funds which had been raised at the time, but Mr. Maxwell absolutely declined to accept any such recognition. Therefore, in regard to Mr. Willcox's statement, that they have failed to' recognise his services, all 1 have to say is that Mr Willcox is either writing on a subject that he is not conversant with or he is wilfully trying to sow dissension, and mislead the public. This, in a way, also applies to your own footnote, wherein you say "as an instance of ingratitude it would be difficult to equal.—l am, G. H. LOONEY. Opunake, December 14th. [We are aware of the "substantial" offer to Mr Maxwell and its refusal by l.im. There is a big difference between an offer of that nature and the offer of a position no one could better fill than he, which carried regular fees. On.: was a gift and the other remuneration he would have been entitled to for services rendered. To a man of public spirit and independence, the first would be somewhat objectionable; the other would be quite acceptabV, It is a pity the leaseholders concerned failed to appreciate the difference. —Ei!.-