BILLET HUNTING.

Waikato Times, Volume XIII, Issue 1109, 2 August 1879, Page 3

BILLET HUNTING.

Sir, — I see that Mr McMinn has, at last mustered courage enough to lot the electors know his moves, by declaring against the Groy Ministry, as he states that ho will neither vote against them, cr walk out, I, for one, think that if Mr McMinn were to walk out for good, and alloAV a better man to take his place, he would bo acting far more honourably to the electors that put him in, also to the mon that he went in to support. Mr McMinn should bear in mind that he would certainly have been beaten last election, were it not that h« led us to believe that he Avas a fii'in supporter of Sir George Grey. And, lam sure that no one then expected to seo the honorable Mr McMinn billet hunting. But, Mr McMinn may bo surprised some day, shortly, to see a dissolution in tho House, when the Waipa electors are all sure to t&fce Mr McMinn's nice conscience into consideration, and place him at the bottom of the Poll. —I am, &c, An Elector.

Sir, — May I crave sufficient space in your valuable paper to reply to your " Own Correspondent's" allegations inserted in your issue of the 24th inst.

In answer to No. 1 statement, viz : " A letter sent to me from a gentleman in Hamilton, under date 14th June, uit., this letter Avas got out of our Post Office on 3rd July, inst." As this excitement is liable to mislead the public, I consider it a duty not oidy to myself, but to those Avho have business with this office, to inform your " OAvn Correspondent '' that, whilst ou a visit to a neighbour of his (this neighbour being one Avho has been commissioned by him to receive his letters, in conjunction Avith others, for delivery), I had the chargin to see these letters laying about carlessly As *' Our Correspondent " is, undoubtedly, an ovit-settler, I doubt not for one moment, had I satisfied my curiosity, .and read the addresses ( on these letters, I might have seen tho identical letter referred to. In respect to this Snd statement, I beg to draAV " Our Correspondents" attention, that the 28th May Avas on a Wednesday, and that letters posted in Hamilton after 1 o'clock on Tuesday, Avould not reach this offico till tho Saturday folloAving. He says, " It was evidently in the Post Office on tho 28th, because there had been no mail betAveen the 28th and 30th. It will be veiy patent to those Avho understand the terms of the Mail Contract, that "Our Correspondent's " brain must have been " wool-gathering," as the next delivery, after the 28th, * would be on the 31st, therefore, according to his own

statement, his neighbour, who has been exalted to tho honoured position of " Own Correspondent'' and post orderly, received it, on application, on the Tuesday following, he, according to his own writing, not calling or sending for it on the Saturday. Statement No. 3 : A letter under date 9th July inst., and with the Hamilton postmark (distinct) was sent to me, by a gentleman in Hamilton. This letter ought to have reached me on the 12th. On that day, I asked if tliere were any letters for me, and was told no. On the 17th, I called at the Post Office, and received tliis letter, the 16th being mail day. Those who arc acquainted with the magnitude of the Piako mail (which often consists of half-a-dozen letters) must know that an error could hardly be made in sorting it. So, tho letter evidently was delayed elsewhere. *-. As "Our Correspondent" seem- so particular with his dates, it reminds -me of one of those precocious youths who, having risen to the Gth form of a Charity School, is desirous to enter public life and air his learning, perhaps he will do me the honour (as no date stamp has been supplied to this office) to come, as subclerk, to date the letters, with a pen, on their delivery, as ho feels so disappointed at not receiving his billet doitx, when expected, it is a pity he has not a smart boy, like Handy Andy, to steal some for him. i

Unfortunately, "Our Correspondent" has aired his ignorance, rather than his learning, when ho confounds the delivery of the Waikato Times with the Mail, as you, sir, are well aware that tho carriage' 1 of your papers is not mentioned in the Mail Contract.

Although I am desirous to oblige the Piako people Avith the Waikato Times, yet, I trust that, unlike " Own Correspondent," they will refrain from airing their ignorance, and damaging my reputation, and that they Avill thoroughly sift the matter. I beg to refer " Own Correspondent " to an advertisement that appeared in your paper some months back, and trust that his brain is not so affected as the dull boy that had on the Duno.e*i_ Cap, and was on the form in his old school days.

Referring to tho purloining of papers, I regret to confess that I havo been ono of those victimised, for I am well aware that 14 copies leave tho Times Office, but when opened in this office, I frequently $uid one or two missing. If " Own Correspondent " has the spark of a gentleman about him, he Avill either accept pistols for two, and coffee for one, or duly apologise, through tho columns of your valuable paper. Sir, apologising for the length of this epistle,-—! am, &c, Wm. G. Harp, Sub -Postmaster, Morrinsville. Piako, July 28, 1879.

Sir, — My object in writing to you is too disprove the wild assertions contained in your Whatawhata correspondent's latest effusion, in which he says that Whatwhata is entitled to a majority in the Road Board, by reason of its larger population, acreage, and bona fide voters. It either suited your correspondent's purpose to wilfully mis-represent facts, or it is merely another instance of the ignorance he is so fond of airing in your columns. Were these ideas confined to himself, there would be no need to trouble you thus, but it appears that he has racceeded in infecting others with them, hence I consider it my duty to try and dispel these illusions. By tho annexed table it will appear that in the parishes of Horotiu and Waipa there are 28 residents, paying a rate of £71 16s 6d, against 21 residents in the parishes of Pukete, Tuhikararmea, and Whatawhata tOAvnship, paying a rate of £36 0s 6d; non-residents, Horotiu and Waipa, 51, rate, £38 6s 3d; Whatwhata,, &c, non-residents, 77, rate, £41 &s 6d. Making a total — Horotiu, &c,, ratepayers 79, rate, £110 2s9d; Whatwhata, &c, ratepayers 98, rate, £77 6s Od. The acreage stands thus '.—Horotiu, &c, 12,101 acres ; Whatawhata, &c, 10,566 acres, including 14 quarter-acre town sections. The bona fide voters {i.e. residents) are divided thus : — Horotiu, &c, 54 ; Whata- ' whata, &c, 40. I think from these figures, which I may say are reliable, and can be verified by any ratepayer, who chooses to take the trouble. It will he seen that Horotiu is fairly entitled to two and AVaipa to one. A glance a,t the table will show that Whatawhata has had more ■ than its fair shave of the expenditure hitherto. It is also noticeable that Waipa has only had £10 spent in it during the last eight years. They want a "correspondent" sadly.— C. T. W. Barton. The following is, condensed in ordinary •form, the table above referred to :— Parish of Horotiu, Ratepayers 66, (towage J0,289-k rate £89 12s 6d; Waipa>

ratepayers 13, aoreage 1,182. rate £29 10s 3d. Parishes of Pukete, Tuhikaramea, and Town of Whatawhata, ratepayers 98, acreage 10,566^, rate £77 6s Od. i-xpenditure in roads and bridges, from lst July, 1872, to 30th June, 1878 : Parish of Horotiu, £644 (including £10 spent in Parish of Waipa, 1874); Parishes of Pukete and Tuhikaramea, town of Whatawhata, £745 16s lOd. From lst July, 1878, to 30th June, 1879 : Parish of Horotiu, £520 ls 6d ; Parishes of Puketo and Tuhikaramea, and Town of Whatawhata, £778 2s Bd, [The Parishes of Pukete and Tuhikaramea, and the tOAvnship of WhataAvhata Avere added to the Newcastle District from lst July, 1872. Ed. W.T.]