THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. SATURDAY, 7, 1875.

Thames Star, Volume VII, Issue 2057, 7 August 1875, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. SATURDAY, 7, 1875.

In the House of Representatives yesterday Sir George Grey presented a petition from the inhabitants of the Thames, "alleging that they had been deprived of certain rights unjustly, and praying for an enquiry." There have been so many petitions sent from, the Thames for presentation to the Assembly during this session that we have lost the run of some of them, and it may be that this one which Sir George Grey tabled yesterday is one that we had no previous knowledge of. There was a petition circulated some time ago by Mr Adam Porter, setting forth a number of grievances, dating from the opening of the goldfield down to the opening of Ohinemuri. and the alleged illegal issue of miners' rights. This petition the drawer up intended to submit to the public meeting called to memoralise the Assembly for.increased representation ; but we pointed out that an attempt was to be made to do this, and the meeting would have none of it. In fact the promoter had not the hardihood to propose it. At a subsequent meeting, however, called to adopt a memorial to the Parliament to open lands in the Thames district for settlement, when the business for which the meeting was called had been disposed of, some person got up and proposed the adoption of this private grier-

anco petition, and. it was adopted while people were leaving the hall in which the meeting was held. It was to receive the signatures of the Chairman of the Meeting and the Mayor of the Borough, but the latter declined to give his signature ; whether Dr Kilgour signed it, we cannot say, but it would appear that subsequently the petition was hawked about by the ostensible author, who managed to get a number of names; and it is quite possible that the petition referred to in yesterday's telegrams is the same one. In Wednesday's Cross it was stated that Mr Adam Porter was about to proceed to Wellington to carry a petition from the inhabitants of the Thames. The Cross gave a synopsis of the memorial, "and we find that it was the document which we have referred to above, fathered by Adam Porter.

We should not have referred to this, matter again but for the mischief which is likely to be done to the interests of the Thames by such a person constituting himself a delegate from the Thames and proceeding to Wellington as the bearer of a petition from the inhabitants. To counteract the evil likely to be caused we really think the • Mayor and Councillors ought to telegraph to Wellington to let the Government know that this self-elected delegate does not represent the inhabitants. We do not think for a moment that he will do much harm, further than this, that his imprudence (and impudence) may induce the Parliament to treat the other petitions sent from the Thames lightly, or shelve them altogether. There, is no telling what the ridiculous assump.-. tion of authority by this person may not lead him into doing, when he could coolly face Sir George Grey and tell him that he had been expending £60 per week in wages for months at Ohinemuri! We have a copy of 4his famous petition before us, and we can scarcely imagine that any man of intelligence, or at all acquainted with, the history of the Thames would put his naaie to it, much less offer any encouragement to an undividual to go to Wellington with the petition, except as a joke of a practical kind ; and if they wanted to exercise a disposition for joking they should have remembered that the most effectual way to bring the Thames "and its petitions into ridicule with the House was to send a man like Adam Porter to represent " the inhabitants of -' thVV'Th'ames." We protest against his ■ assumption of the position, and we trust he will be sent back with a ' flea in his ear; which will be the case if the local representatives of the people take the proper steps to vindicate their own dignity and the good sense of this community, which are both insulted by Adam Porter's consummate impudence in constituting himself a delegate from the Thames to the Parliament of the colony. We make bold to say that not one in a hundred in the district has seen the petition Porter is the bearer of, and that they would not have signed it if they had seen ifcT 'If there" are many signatures appended to it } we should be inclined to question their genuineness. We regret the necessity which has arisen for giving such prominence to Mr Adam Porter, but the occasion requires it, and therefore we have to gratify his love of notoriety while exposing the mischief which such as he are capable of.