CORRESPONDENCE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 4, Issue 1099, 14 June 1882, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

THE CARTERTON BOROUGH . MOVEMENT. • ;

To the Editor.

to,—Your issue of-the 10th inst. concilia a. leader {ityd'od >" The Carterton Borough Movemerit," in wbioli you.-havo . given. yourßelf.some trpublo to shower abuse: upon mej If you will permit me .'.one RpaceJo .reply, I will .consider your as they occur. place, you lead with: " A ineelin*pparently Gjot up. on the timo- • honored, liolo and coi : ner principle." I fail to *ea how the meeting con bo described in these words when it'was duly advertised in the localypreaß, and came ' under, the notice of-the settlers, as is proved by the meeting, notwithstanding the inalemency of the weather, being very - .' largely attended. You next add that I weut out of my, way. to nccujo the WaiRAIUPA Daily of sneering at this township. Now, what I pointed out, with reference to the Daily, w«s Hmt in quoting the population of the various. townihtps through Wairarapa it was justly due .to this township that it should have beeii mentioned that the : statistics to which, the Daily referred only included ! th« town district, or about half Carterton proper.. It, was not I who accused the ••DAM.of sneering at the township, but I confess tliat I quite endorse the remarks of the gentleman who said that in •" ' ••ipeaking of . Carterton ai a quiet, • sober little township tho Daily; did ineerat' this district, and if-you ' ; .do not consider the above a siieer, I don t know how you will" set yourselvos right i ' ' • with the settlers of .Carterton " when you accuse them of not having more iutelli- '' " gence and ability than ta select and place .in power a weak and inefficient Town Buardl, You repiwnt mo as tho family champion of an obscure local print. I •hall not deal with .the-expression, but emphatically deny tha.t I have any connection whatever with, tho "Wairarapa I Observer, and further- that I have never ' read or known of any mailer that has ap- '' peared in its columns kinco.the paper has ■V bedn pulilislied eicejit my advertisement. Again you'remark it is a question whether ch'abging a Town 3oard into a Borough would dp the place- any good without at the same time it could ohango its chief officer, Mr Fairbrother, into, Bay, Mr Bootti', w)io (youmiglit have added) has a larger influence over county advertising. These remarks are hardly consistent when it is remembered that Mr Booth was until very rectntly one of tho weak and inefficient Commissioners of the Town Board. You next go to Groytown for an s -example, ihimluoing the name of Mr Wood, icdltliinkit would have suited yoiir purpose better if you had mentioned some other example, of which there are abundance, without so warmly eulogising »•< - Mr Wood, who, we all . know, advertises largely. But reverting to the point di ■ nien versus the form of Government. - The settlers of Carterton were apparently .. . quite satisfied with tho efficiency with • '■ which the lown or Local Board -had: ful- ■ ■ ' 'filled their duties, as they were re-elected •, ■ : ' almost to.a man, anil bo Boon 'as the Carterton settlers desire .a. .change in the cbairtoanihip, I-am. quite'ready lo give ' mv place to inch perpon. as they may conArmorel competent,/You-say the first JBp foremost advantage for any local centre is to be connected with tho outlying districts. This is a truth which Mr ■ - - Booth can Yeadily grasp, but it is one <&Mch apparently conveys no' force to Mr .Fairbiother'smind. During my 25 years' residence in Carterton! have constantly advocated and supported the opening of the back country, and would not now advocate a Borough if it interfered in any way with the opening up of tho outlying districts. . . . ' Briefly my reasons for advocating a Borough are, firstly, to take in one half of Carterton which is not included in the presejit Town District and which cannot . •'••beincluded, notwithstanding the assertions that have been made to tho con-

. iwry ; secondly, to avoid boiug burdened • wiih a county rale which our neighbors On either side have'taken care to avoid. Why; I ask, should the settlers of Carterton alone contribute to improving the Forty-Mile Bush road with the benjefitu of thd expenditure accruing to Masterton as the nearest township, while Masterton ■ ;■< and Graytown will not contributejone ..penny. ; In conclusion I would refer to iiiy opening remarks at the meeting when ■ l'pointed out that I wan not the leader in , this movement, and only took it up at the request of a number of setters with the understanding that if it wsb not carried tliiongh I would not again have anything tpjdo « iii it. I .was quite surprised to tl.jit a number of settlers who have larger interests in the matter than I have, were not thero to support the movement. I am, &c., R, Fairbrotheb.