BENNETTS-RANGIOKA LINE.

Press, Volume LXVI, Issue 20025, 5 September 1930, Page 13

BENNETTS-RANGIOKA LINE.

IB BDXTOB of TEX PHI 33 Tallott does not appear to ed the two points I endeaoiake in my last letter. 3 figures complained of were ided to represent tlie total of-either area. Lot mo rehe y were to show the comoduction of tho two areas. admitted that, it periiavo shown greater wisdom Ised buch ligures as two ono. xNuvv. is that clear? they are wrong, ,mistaken. What is e interpretation Mr Tallott mined to place upon ..them, ilinistcr, 1 am sure he quite what was meant, nd -point was to show the r which wo were placed, n dm en, as it were, to the in J it was only after every jlu si heme had been sugwe drew any comparisons., n .Mr Tallott refuses to aplight I suggest he try to If m a situation similar. » boot wore on the other i such a stir is created by jq from an irresponsible o myself, we can readily ion - upheaval there -would lad the Department ordered gf the Rangiora-Bennetts tead of the . Eyreton line. Tallott then* have thought 3 thing to compare the two certainly not, and probably ida;.and Carpenter would pfiim to. draw up a case , tom line had to be closed, Eyreton and not the mjietts section. Nobody VbUmed them. Let those been so ready to criticise .they would have done un» • 'circumstances, ami they s less harsh in their judgiion, let me assure Mr Talie' is not alone in seeing ince of keeping both lines too, have stressed it on occasions. No doubt ,all een mixed up in this con-H-neree with that. But ultimatum finally be "one e* closed."' then no matter ak is bpilled over it we are agree as to which one is fours, etc., J. E. FIORRELL. s, September 3rd, 1930.