OTAIHANGA RAILWAY CROSSING.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1810, 24 July 1913, Page 9

OTAIHANGA RAILWAY CROSSING.

Sir, —In. your report of a disturbance at Tuesday's meeting of Hutt. County Council, you did me, unintentionally, an injustice. Your report contained theso . words: "A discussion ensued) which terminated in Mr. Field being asked to return. tho withdrawn lotter."' From this it might appear that I. restored tho letter under compulsion. Not only was I not asked tri return, the letter, but, on tho contrary, its return was tho last thing ' tho council, or rather a section of it, i wanted. They refused to read tho substituted letter because they said they wanted tho withdrawn one, ; devoutly hoping, at .the same time, that they would ncvor get it. Having got it, they refused to read either it or the substituted letter. What they really do want is. to withhold the truth from tho public. . I restored tho lottor to tho council unasked, of my own free will, and in my own and tho public interest,. as my enclosed letter to the council (covering tho withdrawn letI ter) will show. 1 The whole of. the correspondence can bo seen at my office. It is, of course, shameful that a local body should allow an unprovoked and utterly groundless attack on an absent man to bo made at . one of its meetings, and should afterwards refuse to hear any defence or protest, couched in perfectly moderate terms, from tho man so attacked. .Probably, however, in this oase it is not of much consequence, since those of the public who are interested know the individuals involved, and can consequently gauge tho position • fairly accurately—l .'••tun, ©tc„ W.»H. FIELD. 151 The Terrace, July 11, 1913. (Enclosure.) Wellington, m ■•, July i, 1913. The Chairman, Hutt County Council, Wellington. Dear Sir,— Ro Otaihanga Railway Crossing.

Tho clerk's letter of tho 18th ultimo convoying the council's resolution that my last letter he received but not read force3 tino to address you.,again at some length. On April !) last the Otaki' "Mail" reported Councillor Howell as saying (inter alia) in open council that politics were, being. imported into this question, and that tho ratepayers would liavo benefited if I had been excluded from tho matter. There was nothing in tho newspaper to indicate that any other Councillor had contradicted this outrageous statement, and though I afterwards learnt that Councillor Howell's observations were much stronger even than reported, and though annoyed to think that no ' councillor should havo taken my part in the face of tho palpable unjust nature of tho accusatioii, 1 nevertheless decided to treat tho matter with silent contempt, as after all it did n6t seem to me to matter much what Councillor Hoivell said. A week or two later, however, I learned with indignation- that this unanswered nowspaper report was being used to work me injury, and I thereupon on Saturday, May 10, wroto a strong, not under tho circumstances unreasonably strong, letter to the council on the subject. This letter did not. it appears, reach the county office' in, time to bo placed jon , tho order of business for tho council meeting on the succeeding Tuesday, May 13. On hearing this, and having recovered somewhat from my ■ irritation, and feeling that tho lapso of another month would render the matter somewhat stale, I suggested to you that I should withdraw the letter, and substitute another of. a milder character. You willingly consented, and I understand from you that Councillor Howell also, acquiesced. I therefore rang up Mr. Atkinson to make sure' that my action was in order, and subsequently took back the original letter ,and placed in Mr. Atkinson's hands the letter which, the council decided not to read, and which will, bo found to be simply tho original letter shorn of some of its asperities. ' The treatment by the .'council of my -substituted letter, and the extravagant languago in which Councillor Howell, even though tho letter was supposed not to bo.under discussion, described the original letter, foroes mo to restore the letter to the council, and this I now,do. Councillor Howell has demanded its returnjrliis reported words ano: "I object.-to-,to-day's letter being read; I want the. original. Where's tho other letter? That's what I want." Ho ( is now at liberty to select whichever letter-he'chooses,'or both, if he prefers.. To me it is a matter, of indifference. Councillors will see that tho original letter hardly merits Councillor Howell's reported description of it. It is hardly "scurrilous" nor a "disgrace to the man who wrotg it," and it is certainly uritruo to say "it was not withdrawn in a manly fashion." I a;n quoting Councillor Howell's words as appearing 'in the Otaki "Mail's" report of last meeting. I understand that you took occasion to remind Councillor Howell of -his assent to my withdrawal of the letter, and that he, while admitting such, assent, endeavoured to justify his subsequent violent challenge of such withdrawal. Tho Otaki "Mail's" report is silent on this most important point, and it'is not surprising, therefore, that Councillor Howell has"been,at some pains and expense to circulate copies of tho report. The Otaki "Mail" of. the 2nd instant contains a letter from this councillor, in which he suggests that there is some undisclosed correspondence on this matter. I know ,of no such correspondence, and should very much, like to seo it. I again ask, and in tho circumstances I am entitled to ask, that the council will go carefully into tho facts of this matter, and will say what more they think I could have done or can do to assist them or tho ratepayers. I havo offered to join the deputation to the Minister, and I will do anything else in my power. I feel I can rely on tho fairness of _ tho great majority of tho' council in this as in any other matter. It is true there has been a growing feeling outside that tho council is being "run" by Councillor Howell, and that certain' of its members are afraid to stand up against him. I have consistently combated this view, for tliero is, after all, nothing really terrifying about Councillor Howell.

In conclusion, I desire to ask the council not to allow- the present winter to go by without giving effective attention to tho neglected ami fast-spreading sand 'on the cutting referred to in the previous correspondence, and also on tho Main Kijad cutting just north of the intersection of the Otaihanga Koad. A Another summer will probably see my fence undermined in both cases, and the cost of rectifying will be at least doublo what it would be now. 'The cutting on the Main Iload should bo fenced; ris was done years ago with signal success in the case of the cutting a little further on. This sand should never have been allowed to spread at all. It could easily have been kept in check, and even now tho cost of dealing with it would be comparatively trivial. It is not only in my interests, liut in those of ratepayers generally that both cuttings should rcc&ve immediate ■attention.—l am, etc., W. H. FIELD. July i..