THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1896. TIMARU HARBOR BOARD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2933, 15 February 1896, Page 2

THE Temuka Leader. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 15, 1896. TIMARU HARBOR BOARD.

We have had frequent occasion to express sympathy with the shinglo-shiffers of the Timani Harbor Board. They have been caught iu a trap of thoir own making. Thoy condemned the previous board because it would not accept the advice which engineers tendered them, and were elected on the understanding that they would seek professional advice and comply with it. The position of the auti-ahiugle-shifters was more logical. They wero elected by tho district as a protest against tho advice of tho engineers being accepted, and as they could not find an engineer who would recommend a new mode of dealing with tho shingle, thoy decided on having no euginoer at all. Tho complication has really occurred through tho wrong men having been electod last eloctiou. Mr Maxwoll was tho very man for the previous board. Had ho stopped into tho arena a couple of years sooner he would havo boon hailod as tho prophet for whom people had boon looking. But ho did not; he came whon wo had elected a board which had determined on carrying out the old idea of shinglo-shifting, and as ho would not advise that course ho is no good. It makes no difference that Mr Napier Bell has endorsed his opinion ; it would not mattor if all tho ongiuoers in tho world supported him ; certain members aro resolved on carrying out their

own ideas, and nothing else will satisfy them. They do not want an engineer to advise them ; they want one who will take their advice -iud do what they tell him, but Mr Maxwell is not the mau to do that. He was not amenable to much advice when he had a splendid salary at stake, and is not likely to allow himself to be dictated to under present circumstances. The present board were elected to do what an engineer told them, but they have turned round now, and are looking for au engiueor who will do what they roll him. The position is ridiculous, and when this is attempted to be carried to the extent of saddling the district with a salary for a resident onglneer a strong protest is justifiable. What is a resident engineer for T There are no works going on; nothing to be douo except to keep on dredgitig the harbor, and that is not the work of an engineer. There is absolutely nothing to do for aa engineer, unless some new works are undertaken, and we see no intention of doing that. There was some justification for the dissatisfaction expressed with Mr Maxwell's advice in the beginning, as it was a new idea, and those who held strong opinions on the sido of shifting shingle might be pardoued for raising objections. But when Mr Maxwell's opinion was endorsed by Mr Napier Bell all opposition should have ceased, and the scheme ought to have been given a fair trial. The shiugle-shiftors had then done their duty, and no one could blame them, and to carry their agitation further was certainly unwarrantable. We have all along opposed the shingle-shifters, but we certainly cannot endorse the rudeness exhibited by Mr Wreathail at the last meeting of the Harbor Board. If Mr Wreathail thinks his constituents will endorse his impertinence to Mr John Talbot he is mistaken. Mr Talbot is a gentleman with whom we have differed very frequently, and very possibly will differ from him again, but we have always recognised that his services to the public entitle him to respect. We have also no htaitatiou in saying that he is an excellent chairman, a shrewd, level-headed maa, and, above all, a mau whose honeßty has not and cannot be questioned. We do not approve of the vote he gave at the last meeting of the Harbor Board, but we know him so well that we believe him thoroughly honest in his convictions, and that being so ho had every right to his opinions. To suggest, as Mr Wreathail did, that he had other motives than the iuterests of the port for his actions was unfair to him, as his whole public career is a proof to the contrary. We honestly believe that he is wrong, but that he thinks he is right we have no doubt. We presume that there is an end of the shingle-shifting now, and that Mr Maxwell's scheme will get a fair trial. Time alone can prove who is right and who is wrong, and in the meantime nothing is to be gained by attributing impure motives to each other.

CHRISTCHTJROH ELECTION. We are by do means dissatisfied with the result of the Christchurch election. The Government candidate has been defeated, it is true, but we are better pleased that Mr Lewis has been elected thau Mr T. E. Taylor. Had the latter gentleman been placed at the top of the poll, the Prohibitionists would have been so elated with his success that they would have brought out a prohibitionist iu every constituency in New Zealand next election, with the result that, as been the case in Christchurch, the Conservatives would win hands down. The rebuff they have now received iu the defeat of Mr T. E. Taylor will possibly make them pause before again splitting up votC3 and allowing the enemy to secure the elections. The prohibitionists know they have nothing to gain from the Conservative Party; they know that the men of wealth are deeply interested in the liquor traffic, that they hold mortgages on hotels, and interests in breweries, and are not likely to do anything which would cause loss to themselves. They can also see that they have driven the publicanß into the Conservative camp, and thus strengthened that party. They can see all this, aud if they are genuine in their professions as regards temperance they will not play directly iuto the hands of the party from whom they have nothing to gain. The prohibitionists as a rule are Liberals, for they are mostly poor people, but they are the bond-slaves of leaders whose sincerity in the cause of Liberalism we seriously doubt. It is useless to brag and boast of being Liberal unless we act so, at any rate at elections times. The fact that some of the prohibition leaders have bragged and boasted of their Liberalism, but did not act according to their professions, has raised our doubts as to their sincerity. Mr T. E. Taylor, for instauce, has been the most determined opponent the Ministerial candidates have had iu the last two sessions; lie always supported the Conservative candidates, and employed every means in his power to defeat Mr W. P. Reeves aud his friends. Not only this, but he has gone out of his way to iusult the Premier of the colony iu the most groBS aud unwarrantable manner. Had Mr Taylor acted with better judgment, aud paid the Premier the respect to which his hrgh office entitles him, he would have been member for Christchurch to-day. But ho did not; he aud his confreres havo exhausted their vocabularies of Billingsgate iu their efforts to damage the present Government for the last couplo of years, and in the face of this fact no one can wonder at the Ministry opposiug his election, Had Mr Taylor been a reasonable being, who could see that the present Government had done excellent work iu the cmse of Temperauce, aud given them credit for it, he would havo been a member of Parliament to-day. There was nothing to koop him out if he had only declared for tho proseut Government instead of declaring against thoiu. Tho Christchurch election ought to teach tho Liberal members of tho Prohibition League a lesaou. They can see that if they insist on standing aloof from other Liberals and on adopting au iudependont course tlioy must come to tho wall. They polled their best iu Christchurch ; they had a very strong caudidatoiu Mr Taylor, and consequently we cau now see their full strength. They are certainly strong, but not strong enough to act independently aud carry au election. Thoir policy should bo to attach thomsohvs to tho Government Party. Common sense ought to suggest this to them. They have nothing whatsoever to expect from tho Conservatives ; they have already received extraordinary concessions from tho present Government. This being so, they ought to have no difficuly in distinguishing their friends from their onemius, and doubtless they would not if left to themsolves. Tho question is : Are their leaders truly Liberal, or have they made professions of Liberalism with tho view of misleading their followers 1 Their conduct in tho past has mado us think so very often, but it isquito possible that we havo misjudged them. Wo shall see. If after tho lesson thoy havo just now receivod they will persist in their endeavours to dani.igo the proßont Govonimont nothing

can make us believe that they are not Conservatives iu disguise. As for the result of the election, we cannot see that it gives a clear indication of the disposition of the constituency towards the Government. The Government candidate was extremely weak. He was in the house beforo, and was its laughing-stock. The more intelligent and responsible members of any community do not like to be represented in Parliament by a man who is only laughed at. Now this class would not vote for Mr K. M. Taylor on any account, and, of course, Mr T. E. Taylor, owing to his extreme viewß, was their b<Hc noire. They wore thus forced to vote for Mr Lewis, whereas if they had had a good Liberal candidate they would have supported him. This explains the position of parties in Christchurch. To the weakness of the Government candidate the loss of the seat is due.