PROPOSED BOROUGH OF TEMUKA.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1160, 13 October 1883, Page 2

PROPOSED BOROUGH OF TEMUKA.

TO T3E EDITOR

Sib,— Absence from home prevented me from dropping you a note for your last issue. I suppose I am expected to reply to Mr Hobbs. Really I don’t know how. There is nothing it his letter. It is just like an indiarubber doll. It looks well and takes up a good deal of space, but when you come to squeeze it, like the doll, it shrivels up into nothing. Mr Hobbs falls into the error, that I accused the Chairman and the Clerk of the Road Board of being instrumental in getting up the counter petition. It is extraordinary how great men can sometimes fall into errors. If Mr Hobbs will read my letter again he will find that the position is as follows; —The Chairman challenged Mr Quinn to prove that either he or the clerk had anything to do with it, and I only summed up the evidence that Mr Quinn could have brought forward. I said then that both these gentlemen had denied it, and that of course I was bound to believe them It appears, however, that the evidence proved their complicity in the affair, when Mr Hobbs thinks it necessary to champion their course. Mr Hobbs probably told the truth, but there are several degrees of the truth: There is the truth, the whole truth, and the naked truth. Now, did Mr Hobbs go ns far as the last degree, viz, the naked truth ? Has he told everything he knew 1 Did he keep within the secret recesses of his honest bosom little bits of the truth which would not look well for others 1 Well, if he did, ho must be a veritable 1 slow coach’ when it took him five months to get up sufficient energy to oppose the Borough. My impression is that Mr Hobbs could give us a little more information if he liked, and that he did not go so far as the naked truth. He says he is not _ employed by the Board. Who appointed him to the position he occupies? Who can dismiss him when it is found desirable? If the Board can appoint and dismiss him is he not in the Board’s employment ? and yet Mr Hobbs ‘ distinctly denies’ that he is. That is not the naked truth ; it has a very shabby dress on. Mr Hobbs invites me to meet him so that he may give me information about Waimate. I thank him for his courtesy, but I do not want it. if Mr Hobbs wanted to but this small point straight, he ought to have blurted out all he knew in the letter. He says, ‘ The member who first told me is Mr James Austin, one of eur valuable men, and as far as that is concerned it was not through any point of him in telling me that I gained my information from.’ Mr Hobbs has offered to supply me with information concerning Waimate. If he would tell me what is the meaning of the above sentence instead I should feel obliged. 1 take no notice of bad grammar so long as I can understand what I read I am satisfied. The above sentence taken from Mr Hobbs’s letter has neithe head nor tail. It looks like a sentence in which an English and an Irish idea came into collision 'and left confusion as a result. If there is any sense in that sentence it is that Mr Austin was the first to tell Mr Hobbs something, but it was not from him he got his information. Then .where did he gain it ? That is exactly the print. I thought all along that ho got his information from another source. As for the 50 residents that signed both petitions Mr Hobbs need not feel proud of their society. You say, Mr Editor, that the statements in the counter petition were untrue. It strikes me there are a fearful" lot of lies going about in connection tho whole affair, but, of

course the proposed Borough con’d not be opposed on any other grounds. Will the Governor pay attention to a petition made up of falsehoods , he does I shall alter my opinion of him. 1 see that Mr Hobbs repeats Mr Talbot’s /igreat argument against the Borough, viz, v; that the petition was got up by people ' who wanted ‘ billets ’ for themselves. I did not think that Mr Hobbs would descend to this level, but I suppose he was inspired in this as in everything else. And now, Mr Editor, you will excuse me if I point out to you that it appears tome, your " defection from advocating the -.-Borough does not look welh It looks to i me like deserting a sinking ship_ There is a great deal of selfishness in your i remarks on the subject. You want all

the revenue from hotels, etc, spent in : ihe centre of the town. Do not. all the . . towns' contribute to the suppoit of the ,hotels, and don’t you think it would .be ■'charitable tjb take in Sod Town, and make, some improvements in it. You forget .•perhaps the report of that highly intelli- ' gent, and popular officei, the Road Board . . Overseer, whom I may designate as the . third person of ‘ the official trinity’ of the Road Board. So that ! may not be mis-

understood I will explain that the Overjr Beef, the Clerk, and the Inspector of Nuisances are one and the same person, and that is what I call ‘ the official trinity.’ Well, the third person of this official trinity reported that a dam in Sod Town was ■ doing no harm when on the same day a '/ child got drowned in it. Would it not be 1 well to take these people into the Borough . before any more of them get drowned. .... Some of .the suburban residents may'possibly get drunk and be fined, and you Want'that fine spent in the centre of the town, I think, Sir, -it would be.better to bai>e a and a Mayor. 1 see,Mr .‘.rFlatman thinks it absurd that -we should r have a Mayor. MrFlatman.isa-bushman, 0 engaged jin, the wooden trade, and so. we . nqed not wonder if he lets woodenheaded si!ldeas drop sometimes. I cannot help noticing that Mr Flatvnan was very-much in favor of draining Geraldine during the absCnce of the Board’s Chairman, but that "US’soon 'as the' Chairman returned, he dropped the matter ‘ like- a hot’ potato,’ ; He was in favor of a bridge being made [ Somewhere in that district last year dur- , ing .tho absence, of the Chairman but when . that gentleman returned the bridge was l! * knocked bn the head.’ It is fine ,to be a Chairman of a Road Board. I .hope I ' Wn’t iiie until lam one. I like to, have 1 "toiidies abbut me, they are useful, and of course 1 could have them like. other Chairmen.—l am, etc., Truthful James. October 12,1883. [We deny that we deserted the Borough because we looked upon it as a sinking ship. The fact is we do not. and we shall be very much surprised if it is not proclaimed on the 17th, because we do not believe that the Governor will take cognisance of a petition based on false statements. We gave our reasons pretty clearly for favoiing a Town Board in preference to a Borough. If the people in the suburbs do not want to participate in the revenue to which they contribute we see no reason why it should be forced upon them’ They are very foolish, but the people in the town are not responsible for that.— Ed. T.L.] THE PROPOSED BOROUGH OF TEMUKA. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —1 am very anxious to know where the northern boundary line is likely to be of the proposed Borough. When the idea was first originated of converting yonr straggling village into a full-blown Borough, I was given to understand by the promoters of the movement that the northern boundary was to be the road starting from the Oxford and Temuka Railway Bridge, crossing the Main North Road, and thence along what is known as Paterson's Road to its termination at the railway crossing. lam now given to understand that such is not the case, but the Promoters have reconsidered the boundary question and arrived at the wise (?) decision that the north side of Andrewville was quite far enough. Now, Sir, here’s the sore point with me. Why should ray little bit of property be the boundary of the proposed Borough, or why include Andrewville at all ? If I recollect rightly, the north boundary of Wallingford is Cass street. Then why include land that is not in the original township of Wallingford. The large majority of freeholders and householders on the north side of Cass street are quite ftAfciafied with the way the Road Board is treating them and have no wish tor a change. If the residents of Wallingford —or Temnka, as it is called—wish to have the handling of the court fees and fines, auctioneers’ and publicans’ licenses, dog taxes, and the other small luxuries, which in the aggregate are said to amount to -between £4OO and £6OO, I for one do not wish to debar them the pleasure. Oh, no! Sir, the £SOO licenses, fees, fines, taxes, etc, aided by the first year’s rate (say) £l5O, total £650, will be easily swallowed up, and not much will be seen in the shape of town improvements, as, at the very least, £250 will be spent in officials’ salaries, stationery, printing, rent of offices for Borough Council, etc, ■etc. You, I daresay, will feel inclined to ■doubt the accuracy of the above figures, but, Sir, common sense tells me that neither yeu nor any other man will work for nothing if he can help it, and we nil know that there must be a clerk, foreman of works, and in all probability a consulting engineer, and they will have to be paid, so that taking all these matters into consideration I certainly think Wallingford is as well off under the existing state of things as it would ba if under a Mayor and Councillors. But, Sir, in looking through your valuable paper of this day’s date, I must say that ‘ your article relating to Town Districts suited me m many of its points. To my mind a Town Board is all that is wanted for a considerable time, and, as you say. all the publichonses, etc, e'e, are in the centre of the town, bo that all licenses fees, fines, etc, that accrue from their would be ample for keeping the town ol Wallingford in a moderately decent con dition. I have trespassed largely on youi valuable space, but must reserve othei thoughts for a future issue.—l am, etc, Walter G. Rutland. Andrewville, 11th October, 1883.