A REJOINDER.

Feilding Star, Volume VIII, Issue 57, 23 October 1886, Page 2

A REJOINDER.

TO THE EDITOR OP THE STAR. Sib,— Allow me tp answer the explanation which appeared in your Thursday's issue ever the signature of " One who lives in the street: -T It may not be very well known to ' u ~. One who lives in the street" who was the cause - of opening or digging out this watercourse or ditch, as lie terms it ; but the Engineer to the Borough, who was then the Engineer to the Manchester Eoad Board, could, no doubt, inform " One who lives in the street" the name of the man who complained to the Road Board of Mr Keen stopping or filling in the old watercourse. He is not now a neighbor, 1 nor 'does lie live in Feilding. As for the Road Board promising timber to Mxlfceen to put in a culvert through bis property, it is quite false, for when Mr Keen applied to the Road Board, asking them to give him timber for that purpose, it was refused, and that was some time after the watercourse was opened up. "One" who'^ lives in the street" also* denies that it ever was a watercourse ; but this can be proved by two families who lived on, the section before Mr Keen, and , also by property owners in and but of the street, that it always was one, -from the foundation of Feilding, aad long before. " One -who lives in the street" also states that this ditch, as he terms it, was opened to qarry the water from the other side of the road; into the creek; but it was not. The: ditch from the road had nothing to do with the watercourse referred to. If " One who lives in the street" h»d not: been a new chum in Feilding, but had been here when the first complaints: were , lodged to the Eoad Board, be would have known the said neighbor had nothing whatever to do with it on the first occasion, neither has he on this the second. Seeing then that "One who lives in the street," although a . Colonial, was not in Feilding at the time, he should not be se positive in his assertions. : " And new, Sir, as regards the; roadman — this will show how much he knows about his work.- When he came and put another man to open up the inlet from the road, instead of which he should have commenced at. the outlet, which was the cause of the said neighbor referred to not allowing him to interfere with the inlet before the outlet was opened, and the water■ourse cleared below. Further more, the Engineer would not have directed the water across the road if there had not been a watercourse to secure it. So this shows how much "One' who lives in the street" kiows about the matter,' and will also 'show ho* prejudiced he is against the said neighbor. — lam&c., Another Man ix the Street. Feilding, October 21, 1886.