Correspondence.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 4164, 25 August 1881, Page 3

Correspondence.

THE MUNIOIPAL ELECTIONS. TO THB EDITOB OV THB STAB.

SlB, — I have been much struck with the articles which have appeared in your popular journal in reference to the Tramway Company and the Municipal Council; I must also add that the letter which waa published in your issue yesterday over the norn de plume " Ratepayer," so far at least as it had reference to this question, contained some forcible good sense.

I wißh, with your permission, to point out to the citizens that the Tramway Company are necessarily selfish and grasping; their object unquestionably is to make money — of course, honestly if they can— but dividends and the improvement of their property are the whole and sole aims of their existence. For my part, I believe in tram communication undoubtedly, and would be rejoiced to see it extended, but it certainly will never do for the ratepayers of Chriatchuroh to permit the Tvamway Company to help themeelves to whatever concessions and rights which they may happen to set their covetous eyes upon. The ratepayers who are shareholders of the Company are bound by a common tie of self-interest, and will work together in mouloiig public feeling, and voting together, whilst all the rest of the citizens are divided upon numerous other questions. This of course gives the Company a great advantage over the public. In addition, Sir, the Board of Directors, consisting of very shrewd men, meet in private, and may send out any instruments they think proper to achieve their ends and manipulate public men, the press and the oitizens generally. In a oity where so much apathy prevails, where, in short, there are no leading men, a little knot of wire-pullers hke the Tramway Directorate may gather to themselves an immense power. Can it be said that there is no evidence before the publio now of the secret working of this little ring ? How does it come, Sir, that the only retiring Councillor possessed of force of oharacter, keen intelligence, and independence, is the only one Bubjecfctoa fierce opposition ? Mr Jenkins is a Tramway Oompany candidate, and he has been removed from the South-eastward contest io the South-west in order to make tho opposition to Councillor Hulbert the stronger, and gratitude on the part of the Company for tho past and the expectancy of favours to come, will, no doubt, secure him a Beat, unless, indeed, the ratepayers of the west rouse themto reject this nominee. There are other objections to Mr Jenkins, which I need not enter into here, as I wish to confine myself strictly to the question of this manipulating, grasping company. In the North-west Ward there are two seats vacant, and the only candidate as yet announced is Councillor Lambert—a good eaßy well-meaning man, no doubt, but without force, energy, or aptitude for public business. I hesitate to describe Councillor Lambert aB a Company's man, but the truth is, he ir bo uncertain, unreliable and doubtful that, in the absence of any counteracting influence, the Company no doubt safely reckon that they are able to manipulate him. i Then for the Mayoralty the citizonß are to have Mr Taylor forward — another Yankee — another good easy soft-speaking gentleman of the namby-pamby school of Mr Lambert, only a man still more doubtful.

Thus, Sir, the only candidate at present before the citizens who can be relied upon to bring an independent judgment and force of character to bear for the protection of their interests and property is Councillor Hulbert. My purpose in writing is to enquire whether, under these obvious circumstances, it is not the duty of tho ratepayers in each ward to be stirring, with a view to the bringing forward of candidates whi, will look to the interests of the city, and not to those only of the Tram Company. Surely they are not going to ait quietly and allow tho very moderate gentlemen of the Tramway Company to quietly roturn all thoir nominees ? If they do they will never cease to regret it ; the centre of the square, a place which proved a very popular resort last summer, will bo tho first to go, but it won't be tho laßt. For my part I strongly object to the establishment of Yankee rings in this British community, und as a citizen of Christchurch I am not going to havo the carnivorous Amorican Eaglo ilapving its black wings over mo if I can help it. Sir, I trust to soe tho ratepayers waking up and good mon coming forward to rescuo the city from what threatens *i become a municipal plaguo. Lot tho watchword of every ratepayer bo, "Hid Company muat uovor rule the town." Thanking

you for the kind insertion of this, — I am, kc, AN ANTI-SINGER. THE SOUTH-EAST WARD ELEOTION. TO THE EDITOK OF TnE STAB. Bib, — In reply to "A Ratepayer of the S.E. Ward," it may be to his illiterate mind conaummately bud taste to support Councillor Hulbert in thia election. He is perfectly correct, I have, comparatively speaking, no locus standi in the S.E. Ward, tho only property that I possess in that part of the city being a section 6 x 3 in Lyttelton street, well known by notoriety, which I am using aa a stable to keep a donkey in. If your correspondent thinks it would be suitablo for his habitation, I would willingly onvey the same to him. He then would be perfectly correct in his idea that I have no qualification to exercise my vote at the ensuing election. From the really bilious tone of your southeaster, I should imagine that he was an escaped lunatio, or just recovering from a severe attack of the chicken-pock. If that gentleman would like to know who it was got the Heathcote Road Board accounts after two months' hard work in anything liko audit form, I should advise him to consult Uncle Fre^, who would gladly enlighten hiß apparently dark mind. — I am, &o, A HEATHOOTE RATEPAYER. Christchurch, August 25, 1881.

LYTTELION GAOL. TO THB BDITOB OP THS STAB, Sib, — In a communication which appeared in your ably-written journal come time since the attention of the Minister of Justice waß called to the scandalous abuse of power in the management of our gaol, in which it waß shown that some of the gaol officials who hare been in the service of Government for yearß have been studiously and carefully excluded from promotion to the higher gradea and places of emolument. It was ulao shown that a cousin of the gaoler (a comparative stranger) had been thrust over their heads and placed in a position to which rank and time alone should entitle him, and it waa hoped that in the intereßtß of common decency, fair play, and jußtice, steps would have been taken to have a searching investigation into the matter. But public sentiment has been ignored and treated with defiance and contempt. It would seem from the conduct of the authorities, that facta like physic should be thrown to tho dogs, and that auch inconvenient and stubborn commodities should be eschewed altogether. But I would aßk, are the rights and feelings of efficient and worthy servants to be trifled with in thia manner ? Are publio officers to be allowed to go on with unblushing impudence perpetuating thie system of monatroua injustice ? Sir, thia is an odious state of things, and if such publio officers be permitted to continue to hold high and responsible positions, a shock will be given to public morality, and tho administration of public affairs. Such conduct deserves the execration of every lover of justice. The importance of this matter demands the naked truth, and upon strict investigation will be found to be f u'ly substantiated. The sooner an end is put -to this nefarious system of irregular promotion and favouritism the better. Hitherto our present pure, moral and justice-loving Government have treated the matter with contempt, but one will see if the House of Representatives will sanction such barefaced, audacious and high-handed proceedings. Trusting you will find a corner for this in your next, — I am, &c,

SCOTIA.