MR ATMORE AND THE RAILWAY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXIV, 4 May 1931, Page 7

MR ATMORE AND THE RAILWAY

S’ >■'. ■ (To the Editor) Sir.—Your correspondents Mr Gould and “United”, both self-confessed supporters of Mr Atmore have cleared the air, and let full light on to the unwarranted attacks and effrontery, displayed by “Justice”. There are however, just a few more points worthy of mention. We are reminded that Mr Moffatt was defeated by Mr Atmore in 1911. But is it not equally true that in 1914 there was a turn over of nearly 2,000, and Mr Atmore was defeated by 250, and what has been done before, can easily be repeated. Why did “Justice” not tell us that when contesting a Wellington ByElection during the war, Mr Atmore had to actually forfeit his deposit? Wellington would not have him. What of Mr Atmore’s assurance to Nelson electors on the eve of the election “that he would never consent to be a member of any government or Minister that had to depend on Labour to keep it _ ui office.” And yet he has done this without a murmur for 2 years. What of Mr Atmorc’s statement on the eve of the last election, “ That he would not be a member of any government or Ministry that was inimical to the interests of his own constituency, and yet he has remained a silent, uncomplaining Minister of a government that has imposed the greatest injustice ever imposed, on Nelson in the whole history of New Zealand, and has actually aided the government to stop all construction on Nelson’s Railway by voting for this injustice. What do Nelson electors think of this? Are we to take it that all the representatives of every local body in Nelson constituency, and all the representatives of the many organisations, that are associated with these local bodies’ representative s on the Progress League and Chamber of Commerce who are all unanimously and strongly in favour of the railway’s speedy completion- -arc all these out of step and only Mr Atmore in step? The attack on the Mayor cannot fail to prove a boomerang. What of the boasted efforts of Mr Atmore to put the Cawthron Trust on a sounder basis. This eventually successful effort first emanated in the Nelson City Council, and was vigorously advocated in the local press before ever Mr Atmore took steps. Is it not a fact that he was animated by political feeling in his efforts? And is it not a fact that Mr Moffatt was Mr Atmore’s right hand most ardent supporter both outside and within the precints of Parliament. So much for the boast of Mr Atmore’s services which we are to believe he did off his own bat. What heinous crime is the Nelson City Council supposed to have committed in sending a, vote of thanks to Mr Black for his splendid, single-handed work for the Midland Railway.? Would they not still more glady have added even greater thanks to the member for Nelson if lie had stood true to his pledges and promises? Has it now come to pass that Nelson Council 1 . Waimea County Council, The Progress League and public men, have to get Mr Atmore’s sanction before taking any action of any kind that may either annoy or reflect on him. May we not, rather’ ask in whose gift is the Nelson seal~t.be electors or Mr Atmore? I am etc. AN ELECTOR. Nelson, 2nd May.