MR CLAYTON AND HIS TACTICS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1585, 16 October 1905, Page 2

MR CLAYTON AND HIS TACTICS.

(To the Editor Gisborne Times.)' Sir, —I hod a great deal is made of Mr ■ Clayton s statement at bis Gisborne meeting tbo other night to the effeot that the | County Counoil being the representatives > of the peoplo oould not get any grant for the Puatae rooks until a friend of Mr Carroll’s wont down to Wellington and told him that his seat was in jeopardy, and that a grant of £SOO was then made, and he claimed it was wrong for any man to have this power. Tbo Dame of this friend is freely used in the street by Mr Clayton and others. These remarks are to my certain knowledge without justification or foundation, for I was in Wellington four days before this friend of Mr Carroll’s attivod there, and the day after I arrived there (being a Tuesday) I met Mr Carroll. in the street, and in course of conversation I asked him why the usual £2OO grant for the Wainui Coast road had been oot down to £IOO, and ho replied to the effect that he J had been battling bard for the coast road and was very anxious to have a substantial grant made for the Fuatae rooks, and he had succeeded in getiiDg £SOO placed on the estimates foe them, whioh meant that £9OO bad boon granted for expendi* tare between Gisborne and Tolago; he also stated that he hod purposely not had . tho £BOO grant specially earmarked for the Puatae rocks in case the County Council. should prefer to use the money to make a deviation over the bills io order to avoid tho rooks, but he had secured £BOO to be spent as the CouDty Council liked; he also mentioned the fact that tbo press had re* ported a grant of £250 for the Waipaoa Bridge, and that is a misiake. So far there has been no grant for the bridge, as bo intended to get that dealt with when the supplementary estimates were on, and ho expected to get a substantial grant for the bridge then. Now this conversation took plaoe on the Tuesday, and Mr Car. roll's frieod had not then arrived,in Wei- : lington, but I mot the friend as be arrived ' with his luggogo from the train at the Royal Oak Hotel on the Thursday following. He was ia company with Mr J. W. Nolan and Mr Morris of Haniti, who cbu boar mo out in this. I loft Wellington by the express on the following morning, so it is absolutely untrue of Mr Clayton to say that this friend went down to Wellington, and as to the means of gottiog the £BOO grant, Mr Carroll had in faot eocurod it long before this friend went to Wellington. When Mr Lewis (the Government valuator) challenged Mr Clayton’s statement that the Government had given instructions to the valuators to valuo high, Mr Clayton stated emphatically that ho oould show from Hansard that tho Premier had acknowledged in Parliament that these instructions bad been giveD, arid when he next day givos his quotations from Hansard it shows nothing of the sort, bnt that ** Mr Massey had said eo, a very different c Vthing. Mr Clayton also misrepresented the Publio Revenue Act at his meeting when ho stated that the Act made the Treasurer the final arbiter between the • j Audit Office and tbc Treasury. He stopped reading tbo seotion jußt when ho should havo read on, whioh would have shown that Parliament was in fact made the final arbiter. The scctiou also provided that tbc Attorney-Goneral had to give nn opinion on the question, and the Audit Offioe’s objection had to be rnado in writing and both placed before Parliament. There are other ioacouraoies in Mr Clayton’s remarks which oould be questioned, but I content myself in referring to the above ia case some, who are dissatisfied .-'4 with politics as they stand, may be too ,£;£ readily influenced by such statements. I would remind thoso who may feel irritated ; that thoi e is such a thing as cutting off our nose to Bpite our tsoe. We do not waot.to do that, but we want to work for results, j —X am, etc., W« DOUGLAS ItISNARt