The Temuka Leader. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1878.

Temuka Leader, Volume I, Issue 79, 18 September 1878, Page 2

The Temuka Leader. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 18, 1878.

We have read with somewhat of surprise and amusement the speeches made at a meeting held at Timaru on Thursday last called for the purpose of discussing the High School question. One of the speakers, the Rev. Mr Gillies, evidently has found a mare’s nest. He tells his hearers that it is easy to get a High School of the first water for Timaru. Only get a Bill passed granting the promoters an endowment of a £IOOO yearly income from the revenue derived from reserves set apart for secondary education and the thing is done. The resolution is so loose that it does not tell us where the reserves are situated from which this revenue is to be derived, whether in the North Island or the South Island, whether in Otago or Canterbury, whether in North Canterbury or s outh Canterbury. It is sufficient for us to know that it is proposed to take it out of the reserves set apart for secondary education, but as the endowment for Invercargill School was taken out of revenue accruing from lands in the same province, and as the Waitaki High School proposal aims at the same thing, we are warranted in believing that Mr Gillies has the same object in view. As guardians of the public interests of this district we must protest against this project. The people of Tiraaru having been allowed to appropriate £60,000 of money which belongs to this district to erect their skittle alley for the waves to play with make bold to go a step farther and attempt to rob us of our rights in educational matters as well. We are not opposed to Timaru having a High School, the number of the children in and around the little town lias some claims for consideration, but so also have the other centres of population. If Timaru can obtain from Government a grant of land to give them an annual income of £IOOO we offer no objection, but if Timaru attempts to monopolise the whole of the revenue provided for secondary education for South Canterbury we say put your hands into your own pockets not into jurs. Let us just look at the case as if this proposed Bill were passed. The proportion of reserves settled by Act of Parliament for higher education last session is one fourth of the whole. We might ask, before going further, where would Mr Gillies get his £IOOO income from? Would one fourth of the present revenue from the whole reserves give him this £IOOO ? Would it give half? Would it give a third of that sum? Let him answer in the affirmative if he can. If we are right, then it would absorb the whole of the revenue, and not complete the glorious picture sketched out by the promoters of the Timaru High School alter all. Reference was made at the meeting to the Waitaki (or Oamaru) High School project. If the speakers at that meeting will look over the parliamentary papers they will find the whole of the revenue from educational reserves does not amount to over £2OOO. If then the large reserves set apart for education in Otago, covering some 800,000 acres, only gives this revenue, what will the lands set apart for South Canterbury give ? But with us it is not a question of amount, it is a question of principle. Timaru at present is the largest, centre of population south of Christchurch. Who will say it will be so twenty or even ten years hence? Who will say that Ashburton, who will say that Waimate, who will say that Temuka, or Winchester, or Geraldine, will not be larger cities than Timaru ? Where then will their endowments come from ? Timaru with its £IOOO now would be Timaru with its £20,000 then, and may he towns with double its population without a penny. No, no. This will never do. If the endowments for higher educations are to serve the purpose our legislators intended either these reserves must be let alone or a certain propor-

tion sot apart for cadi district. Why should we cat the hi’cad of our cliildrcii that must come after us ? This tampering with the provision that has been made hy our legislators for future generations is vicious in the extreme. We admire Mr Gillies’ pluck and energy, but Mr Gillies and his friends must remember that Tiraaru is not all South Canterbury. We ask them to bear in mind that these reserves arc ours as well as theirs. If the promoters of the Timaru High School still persevere in the course they have just chalked out it will bo the duty of the outlying districts to send a strong protest to the Government or Parliament against passing any measures of this kind, a measure to benefit the few at the expense of the many. Tiraaru needs secondary education, but beyond a few miles circuit the same objection would operate against Timaru as against Christchurch, to wit, the great expense of sending children from home. If we are to have first-class educational institutions in this country let us have them fust-class. Let Mr Rees’ suggestion be acted upon. Let us have one. for Auckland, one for Wellington, one for Christchurch, and one for Dunedin ; then let them be well equipped and well endowed, and let those who can afford it send their children to study, where they can study to profit. For the Test let common Grammar Schools and District High Schools, in terms of the Act, be provided, but do not let every little place think it is entitled to be called a seat of learning. In writing upon this subject we write with the recollection that the Houses of Parliament are not so favorable to the Waitaki High School movement as the speakers at the meeting referred to would have their hearers believe. The Waitaki School Bill was referred to the Local Bills Committee, after able speeches against it, by the Hon. Mr Waterhouse, the Hon. Dr Pollen, Sir F. Dillon, and others, whose knowledge ,of these matters and whose independence of action arc sufficient guarantees that the interests of the many will not be sacrificed to enormously enrich and over privilege the few. We may have to return to this subject again short’y.

The ‘New Zealand Times ’ of the 13th' inst, in its report of the proceedings of Parliament on the preceding day, contains the following : “ Harbor Endowment Biles. ‘ ‘ There were 13 of these Bills on the paper for second reading.—The Hon Mr Sheehan said he was going to ask the House to discharge all these Bills, and those that were before the Waste Lands Committee, because the Government had come to the conclusion that this system of asking the House to grant large blocks of land as endowments to harbors in all parts of the Colony must be put an end to at once. [Hear, hear.] If it were not stopped, the policy of last year, by which the colonialisation of the Land Fund was secured, would be practically reversed, and the result would be that so much of the public estate would be taken away that the Minister of Public Works would find it necessary to withdraw his railway and public works proposals. He begged to move that these Bills be discharged.— Dr Hodgkinson protested against the discharge of these Bills, remarking that had provincial institutions been still in existence, harbor works would have gone on in various parts of the colony.—Mr Wakefield also protested, and hoped a distinction would be made between the cases of harbors that were ’necessary and feasible and those that were not. The House should take the decision of the Waste JLands Committee on each Harbor Bill presented, and by so doing he believed that no injustice "would ensue. He would ask the Government and the House to consider those districts in which harbors were needed, and where the work of harbor construction would be most earnestly undertaken. He certainly objected to those Bills being slaughtered in the wholesale manner proposed by the Hon the Native Minister. After some discussion, in which Messrs M‘Lean, Woolcock, and Bowen took part, —Sir George Grey stated that the Government were fully aware of the importance of harbor construction in connection with the railway scheme. The course which the Government proposed was to have reports made with respect to colonial harbors, and of course funds would have to be provided for such of these harbors as were considered great colonial works. The House might rest assured that the Government would give its best attention to this important question, which they considered of equal importance to that of railway construction ; but it was to check this indiscriminate attempt to get hvge endowments out of the public estate that the Government proposed the amendment moved by his hon colleague .The Hon E. Richardson expressed his satisfaction with the statement of the Premier that the question of harbor construction would have the earnest attention of the Government, and he hoped the Government would persevere in the Harbor Bill which was now before the other branch of the Legislature Some of the Bills were withdrawn, and the remainder discharged from the Order Paper.” We call especial attention to the statements of Sir George “Government were fully aware of tbo importance of harbor constuiction in connection with the railway scheme and, “ Funds would have to be provided for such of these harbors as were considered groat colonial works.” Now, a harbor for South Canterbury must be considered a great colonial work. It is impossible that the wide and fertile country between the Rangitata and the Pareora, and from the sea to Burke’s Pass—to take no wider limits—can be profitably worked if its productions must be carried by rail to Lyttleton, to Dunedin, or even to Oamaru. South Canterbury must have, and will have, a harbor. The only question is, where will it be—at Milford or at Timaru 1 We have answered this question often enough. We do not flatter ourselves that we can “sway the destinies” of the Timaru harbor works. The waves of the Pacific will do that. We are confident

that not only will a harbor never be made at Timaru, but that the 100 feet mole now in hand will not be finished before the futility of the whole scheme will be plainly manifest. We are of opinion that the Government see this as plainly as we do—that the impression of the country generally is the same as ours. We feel no diffidence, not the slightest, in expressin,u| this our opinion, for Sir John Goode’s report on Timaru condemns, by implication, the plans at present pursued there. That eminent engineer offered a plan which we might place some faith in, but in comparison with the Milford scheme that plan has two great disadvantages, v : z., that if and when completed it would be insecure as a work, arid would not afford quiet water, and it would cose an amount of money out of all proportion to its value. Whatever works may be proposed for making the Milford Lagoon a harbor, there can be but a comparatively small portion exposed to the direct action of 'the sea, and these must under any plan be disposed in the best position for meeting that action. As to cost, wo would like to know how a very large snm could be spent in simply securing a channel through a narrow shingle bank. The ‘Herald’ seems 1 o think that we are trembling for the fate of the Milford scheme, and says we are merely playing dog in the manger. We really do not suppose that either the 1 Herald’ or the Leader can make or prevent the making of a harbor anywhere. The opinions of either will not influence the operations of nature nor the conclusions of engineers. We only point out probable results, and these are quite as important as present facts. We are sure that the Milford scheme is in no danger of being cast upon the rubbish heap of “might-have-beens.” The whole tenor of the Premier’s remarks corroborates this our assurance. A report has been made, and another is to be made, upon this scheme. The first was altogether favorable, the second we have not the slightest doubt will be equally favorable. We are sure that the Government will deal impartially in the matter, and in providing a harbour for South Canterbury, a work of colonial importance, will adopt the most feasible, the most useful, and the cheapest schema that is proposed to them. And this, without a shadow of doubt, is the Milford scheme. .-■-’V 111 iwiMwiiirmTTTT-im