Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.


TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In reply to “ Fairplay,” I would ask him if ho thinks for a moment that handing over the control of the railways to three commissioners would invalidate tho agreement entered into by the settlers of West Harbor and the original promoters of the line ? The obligations contained in said agreement were undertaken by the Government when they took over the railway, and are as binding now as ever they were. Apart from that, it is news to me to learn the Government have disposed of the railways at all. What was the consideration paid, Mr “ Fairplay,” and what has become of the money? Perhaps they were assigned for love, favor, and affection ? If “ Fairplay ” sells, assigns, or transfers property with a mortgage or other burden on it, it is disposed of subject to the mortgageor burden. Is this not so ? The mere fact of the assignment or transfer does not relieve it of the burdens and obligations. “Fairplay” must therefore admit that if the railways are disposed of (which of course I do not admit) they were taken over on the same terms on which they were originally held. The Commissioners are appointed by the Government, and, although they have entire control, are still the servants of the Government. If a serious accident happened through the blundering of the station-master at Sawyers Bay, to whom would the sufferers look for compensation ? Not to the Commissioners, I’ll be bound. If “ Fairplay ” can find time to visit the Athemeum, I would strongly advise him to peruse the agreement above referred to ; and, as it takes two at least to make an agreement, one party cannot cancel it. “ Fairplay ” says “if he does not go to church himself he does not hinder others from doing so.” What on earth is his purport in writing then, if not to prevent me going ? As I said before, these trains have to run on Sundays, and, as they have to run, why not run at hours that will be convenient and will pay better than at present ? It’s nonsense for “ Fairplay” to drag in the question of the employes’ hours. If they work four hours more they will be paid for it, I have no doubt. No man asks a servant to work beyond his stated hours without remunerating him in some way for such extra labor, and Government servants are as well treated in that respect as others.—l am, etc., Burkes. Dunedin, August!).

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

Bibliographic details

THAT PORT CHALMERS LINE., Evening Star, Issue 7978, 6 August 1889

Word Count

THAT PORT CHALMERS LINE. Evening Star, Issue 7978, 6 August 1889