CANAL AND MAYORAL ELECTION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXXIII, Issue 15902, 13 April 1912, Page 12

CANAL AND MAYORAL ELECTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —The ratepayers of this city must he possessed of very defective memories when they overlook the fact that there is a prominent gentleman in our midst who has consistently and persistently advocated the construction of the canal. Need I say that gentleman is Dr Thacker, who is known as a fearless and outspoken advocate for the construction of the canal. It cannot bo denied that Dr Thacker would make an admirable Mayor. The supporters _ of the canal must not allow the retiring Mayor, the newspapers or the Commission to slacken their energies. Neglecting to bring <Sut an advocate of the canal would bo an admission of weakness and might be construed by opponents as a verdict of secession from the scheme. This is certainly an opnortune time for those on the 6ide of progress to support a strong advocate for the canal at the ensuing Mayoral eleotions. It is all fudge to argue that Hie Commission’s report has placed the scheme outside the pale or a practical work. It may certainly result in giving it a set-back if the retiring Mayor is unfortunately re-elected. Dr Thacker, in season and out of season, through fair and adverse criticism, has never wavered in his allegiance to the scheme, and as he is endowed with bulldog courage the community may rest assured that h© would be the last man to be thwarted bv an adverse report on a project that he has so much at heart. In Canterbury we have experience on adverse reports on national works. Take, for example, the plains water-races. An eminent engineer at ono time contended that open waterraecs would prove a rank failure, as the water would percolate through the 6hingle and that iron pipes would prove necessary. Fortunately, the advocates for the open races opposed the engineers’ views and obtained a trial of the open race system, which resulted in seriously depreciating engineering opinions. The vested interests at this stage of the canal scheme for the time being outweigh the common-sense and progressive views as advocated by its supporters. This obstacle can be sweet aside by rejecting Mr Dougall and electing, a man who will stick to his guns desnite an adverse report. I hone the advocates of the canal will rally round Dr Thacker and return him triumphantly, at the head of the poll on election day. Tho victory would mean a recovery of lost ground .caused by an unlooked-for report, mainly influenced, by vested interests.—l am, etc., EDWARD BARRETT.