HARBOR LOAN PROPOSALS

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LI, Issue 84, 28 March 1908, Page 5

HARBOR LOAN PROPOSALS

MK. HUG-HES' POSITION'. Mr. D. Hughes. recently appointed a nwmber of the New Plymouth Harbor Board, writes .is follows to the Hawtri Star:—'-In your report of above lasr mooting, taken from the Taranaki News, there is a construction put on my n ■ marks when I spoke again=t the Bill which i strongly object to. [ am made out to say that 'at -ome of the meetings when addressing the ratepayers I toKl them that I would support the Hill if a sinkiug fund were added. I'udoubtedly the Bill was a good proposition. I would ! like to support it, but did not think 1 could.' Now. sir. what I said wa-- this: "That 1 had said at meetings I would support the Bill if a sinking fund added, but the way the people had "hown their animosity to the Bill a*.

the recent election proved they did not want it. Also 1 had since found out that the loan in existence could be re-

borrowed with sinking fund without any alteration in the law. Messrs. Maxwell and McLean had said it could not be reborrowed without a special Ac:. That the ward 1 represent ought to be cut out. That the Bill would be strongly supported by me if my interests wove in New Plymouth as it was a good business proposition for them.' I am sorry to bother your readers with this mnch-debated harbor question, but time and again I have let the Mew Plymouth papers' reports go by without contrndicting them, but 1 can clearly sec aut wish to warn your readers that anything said against the Bill on the Board is carefully eliminated by the Press oi that town. Last 1-ebruary meeting 1 wanted a sinking tuua included, but was pooh-poohed by those who are us strongest advocates now. This, of course, was not made public at the time, as the Press no doubt thought it woul* militate against the Bill. Whilst lam on this Board I intend to help the representatives from this end to get I he people their rights and see that justice is done them in the future in regard to this iniquitous loan which they should never have been saddled with, i will go further and say that it is a blot on our legislators of the past to have loaded these fair plains with a New Plymouth rate when we practically have no community of interest."

[_\lr. Hughes' grievance i-, after ail, merely that of the young aud inexperienced public- man who has not learned to appreciate criticism. Old hands view with amusement, the complaints ci tyros, and the equanimity of a newspaper ia rarely disturbed by allegations of misrepresentation. The fact is that Mr. Hughes, who may be, and no doubt is, endowed with a New ZealanderS •share of native, though latent, ability, in a business sense, is as yet anything but a success as a speaker, and the reporter has to exercise his ingenuity to chronicle, as nearly as possible is his own words, the meaning such speakers as Mr. Hughes intend 10 njuWy. What ilr. Hughes claims to have said no doubt was what he mtentkd to say, but failed to express. We should indeed be sorry to do Mr. Hughes an injustice, aud, should space permit, may consider the wisdom ol giving ilr. Hughes' verbatim reports of his .speeches in future. We are afraid, however, he would not thank us for the privilege. Seriously, however, Mi". Hugfces' complaint is puerile in tlie extreme, and can only be likened to the whimperings of a spoilt child. We ouiy regret that ilr. Hughes' hoasted fa>"ness did not prompt him to lodge liii complaint with us, instead of endeavoring tto heap obloquy where it might have escaped notice.—Editor News.]