NAPIER V. HASTINGS.

Hastings Standard, Issue 55, 30 June 1896, Page 2

NAPIER V. HASTINGS.

[To the Editor.] Sir.—The struggle that has been going on between the tAVo towns must reach a climax before long, as the public convenience must be studied. Can any sane person suggest a solitary reason Avliy the Hastings Jockey Club, the Hastings Agricultural and Pastoral Association, and the IlaAvke's Bay County Council should not hold their meetings in the most suitable town. There was a dreadful amount of profane language 011 Saturday night Avhen owners and trainers were compelled to run in to Napier to get the Aveights for the second day's races. It is positively unjust to patrons to continue the present unsatisfactory arrangement, and to all interested it is plainly apparent that the headquarters of the Jockey Club should be in Hastings. Then, as to the A. and P. Association, is it- not ridiculous that for a committee meeting to authorise the erection of a couple of sheep-pens members haA'e to go in to Napier? The County Council ■meetings should also be held in a more fu-vorable spot. It Avould certainly suit members very much better than tour-, ing to Napier, and the offices being h. re would save a deal of trouble and expense to ratepayers. These three important bodies should at once consider the advisability of studying the convenience of the general public.—l am, &e., Pro Bono Publico... Hastings. June 29th, 1896.