THE H.B. TRIBUNE. MONDAY, APRIL 24, 1911. THE HARBOUR ELECTIONS.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume I, Issue 110, 24 April 1911, Page 4

THE H.B. TRIBUNE. MONDAY, APRIL 24, 1911. THE HARBOUR ELECTIONS.

First let us commend the public spirited actions of Messrs. Plowman, AVhyte and Clapham in withdrawing their names from nomination for election to seats on the Napier Harbour Board. It speaks well for public life in Napier and Hastings to find men willing to trample on their personal aspirations for the good of a cause. There is more in the sacrifice made by these men than meets the public eye. They may be likened to pawns in politics, sacrificed to win the game. But it must be remembered they are human pawns, possessed of hopes, MM

gain. AVin-the-game-but-let-me-be-in-at-the-finish is the predominating sentiment of most candidates. Rar?Jy do yon find one who is not willing to risk party defeat when there is a remote chance of personal success. And further, what I candidate is not himself “cock-j sure” of defeating his opponents; at the poll. Even our old friend ; Mr. J. A. Miller nursed the vision-1 ary hope of lowering Eustace j Lane’s colours next AVeckiesday. I Does not his misleading dream in i this direction emphasise the mag-; nitude of the sacrifice made by the I other candidates in standing down to avoid splitting the votes ? Speaking of Mr. Miller, we publish to-night the portion of his letter held over from Saturday. Personally, we think his epistle does not; improve his chances of success, and; we even venture the opinion it; would have been better for him' had it not appeared at aIE He j claims to be ‘‘nominated by Hast-j ings men.” Exactly., But he does; not. hold the patent rights for that j privilege. AVe detract nothing; from the worthiness ; of MessEfi. O’Reilly and Roach, his nomina-! tors, when we say that the intelli- j gence of Messrs. David ScannelL and AV. J. AA r hite, two leading soli-; citors in Hastings, compares fav-! ourably with theirs, and these two! gentlemen are Mr. Eustace Lane’s! nominators. Mr. Miller innocent-i ly tells us it is true he supported! the last £.300,000 loan proposals, I because, forsooth, of the report ■ from three engineers. He stands condemned by his own pen. If he stood by- the report J 8 months ago, to be consistent he stands by it to-: day-, for not one word in the re-; port has been altered—not one; clause amended, not one state-; rnent qualified. The natural con-; ditions at the Breakwater and ! Inner Harbour are also the same to-day as then. He even says he does not set up his opinion against the engineers. AVhy, then, does he vacillate, hesitate and prevaricate? The three engineers’ report, to use a colloqualisin, is “good enough” for him, “but seeing the; uncertainty- existing (sic) as to! which is the best solution of this! problem (sic), he is prepared to j review the whole question from the j beginning.” Mr. Miller was at the' meeting the other night when the views of the breakwater under last April’s storm conditions were shown on the screen. He there saw pictures of the ( mighty Pacific sweeping over the structure, the angry billows lifting their enormous crests to from 20 to 50ft above the concrete wall ; he saw the sad havoc done by 20-ton con-i Crete blocks —wave breakers—as I they Irish jigged in the arms of; Pacific swells to the lee side of the enclosure ; he saw the turmoil of water in the harbour (?) which drove shipping in the teeth of the ■ gale from the alleged haven to I seek shelter behind the Kidnap-' pers. Yet he still speaks of sup-j porting, i.e., spending thousands; of pounds of the ratepayers’ money: on the breakwater, if recommencl-L ed so to do. Is it in this wayJffi!

is going to safeguard the invests of Hastings 'I To be canded, we are at a loss to understand why he appears in Harbour Board matters at all. He says he retires from Municipal office because of the sacrifice of time involved, and yet he seeks election as the sole representative of Hastings on the Harbour Board. His knowledge of civic matters is infinitely greater than his knowledge of harbour affairs, and it is generally felt that if he lias leisure for the latter he has it for the former, even though only to perform, the duty of one councillor of nine. We are sorry to have to speak against his candidature. for iv? recognise the great amount of good work he has done for Hastings during his term of office as Mayor. But there arc other things to consider, and it is felt that the responsibilities attached to the Harbour Board this year are too great to warrant the Hastings seat being given to him as a reward for his Mayoral services.