The Special Harbor District.

Gisborne Standard and Cook County Gazette, Volume III, Issue 390, 13 December 1889, Page 2

The Special Harbor District.

(To the Editor of thi Herald, per favor of

SrurDABD.)

Sin,—lu your issue of the 6th inti., and under the heading •• Mr Arthur at Kwaka, ’ you inform your readers, among other things, that " Mr Scott asked some question in reference to the extended harbor district, which was answered in a moet tatiofattorif manner.” The italics are my ojrn. With your permission I will qatsUon verbatim. Will Mr A. 0. Arthur, if aleeted, be in favor of having an amendment ot the Gisborne Harbor Act introduced to Par. Lament next session, tor the- pnrpoee ot abolishing the special dietriot upon which is now levied rates to provids intajsst and (inking fund on £40.000, and In lieu of tha special district, make the said saws toviqbla ever the whole of the Glrt>«»e«; Harbor District ? ’ Mr Arthur replied auqtoiog to the following purport“ It elected,[l would not promise to introduce such a meeeure ae Mr Scott proposes. Though" my* Tokomaru property ie now exempted from bearing Its share of the rates complained of, that te not the reason I would not move in that direction indicated by the question. The exemption from rating the lands, on the North ot Tolago is iniquitous, and I batiste serried out at the Instance of Whitmore io.tto. Qounoil. But Harbor BjjMds are so distasteful to Parliament that there would be no ohenos of passing such a measure; besides, the rotes amount to only about £4OO annually.” Now, Mr Editor, if the question you refer to in your iseue ot the 6th -ioet. (which I only received laet evening) is intended to apply to my inquiry at To Karaka and Mr Arthur's reply thereto, than yoqr deduction Is very misleading. ...... Though Mr Arthur’s reply was polite and may be most satisfactory to himself and to that portion of tha electors whoso.'largo and valuable properties extending ttom Tolago ,^ U ’ a • *»Mrtora Ml ot leghlation, now exempted from bearing their Just share ot a joint MoWltty, and the sote burden of. prosiding insaroat and sinking fund ou the necessary expenditure oi 440,p00.1s oast upon ths ratepayers located within the •pooisl. dlatriot . repeat that thumb Mr Arthur's .■ sSaly- *4o mj question may ba moK seiieiaotory- to that portion, ol the aleoiqrate, il was- htebly. uneatiefastory to myralf and others -Wbt art now bearing an undue ahara ot isMtton tor tha sonslraatlon ot a harbor, and from which oppraaalon Mr Arthur, it sleeted, declares hia inability to soak any redress. - Übhanas ratepayers within the special district | By the influence ot a powe.ful confederacy, ffi and out of Parliammt, your interests have brt > aaorifleed. You have been robbed olsarritorial revenues to conciliate tbe rapacity at those akin to the daughters ot the homiest, whioh cry, “Give 1 give | and ate never satisfied; *u r Ie *• • aoß » h r and thwir evil deeds have been ratified by a p'ltut and too credulous Parliament, and your late repreientalive acquiesced in tfis Ml ot spoliation, t. Will you return to Parliament a Mridida'a who would be a mere revised, edition ot bls prs'leoeaaor, who would not raise bls vole* to demand redrew, because, forsdothl it would be distasteful to Parliament ? Do you think the Gisborne harbor special district would have disgraced the B’alute Book it Mr W. L. Ries had eat in Parliament as yens representative ? Never I The framers of that measure would have hidden "their diminished heads ■' witfi shame aqd obloquy before the'powertul protests ot tint gantlamsn, and nothing short ot a powerful edrod toy can restore to the people ot thia disteist, the revaniies that have been filched from-them.— I am, <fea., Gao, Bqjtt Tbs WJlows, Dioember 11. [The above letter wts intended tor one contemporary, but was tou l*ts tor insertion last evening.—Ed.]