MR JICKELL’S ENGAGEMENT.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2219, 17 June 1908, Page 3

MR JICKELL’S ENGAGEMENT.

QUALIFICATIONS OF MR. MESTAYER INTRODUCED. THE MAYOR CENSURED. At last night’s meeting of the Borough Council tlie question ol Mr. Jiekell’s engagement to report upon local drainage matters was again discussed. Alter tlie outward correspondence liad. been read, ~i i Or. Mann asked il Mr. Jukell had lieou informed that his engagement was cancelled. The Mayor: No! ■ Civ Mann: Ho was notified ,oi the engagement, jvliy not of the Council s decision to cancel -the engagement-,. Tho Mayor: Mr. Jiekell was already here, and there was another resolution ponding; so I did not cancel his engagement-pending discussion of. Or. Wliinray’e notice, of motion. Cr. Mann (sarcastically): Yes, I thought that would bo your explanation. In other words you are converted. , The -Mayor: Well, that is the reason. Cr. Mann: l am glad to seo you are converted. . ■ The Mayor reported having sent tho following telegram to tho Mayor of Nelson: “Understand Mr. Mestayer designed your drainage scheme; kindly wire me if you have found him satisfactory.” Tho reply received was, “No; not satisfactory.” A similar telegram was sent to tlio Mayor of Feilding, and the reply received was: “Scheme completed prior to my Mayoralty; Council terminated Mestayer’s agreement before ‘works finally" completed.” Cr. - Sheridan asked if the correspondence came from the Council or from the Mayor. The Mayor: From me! Cr. Sheridan: Preposterous. You might as well ask them what they thought of Mr. Leslie Reynolds, the “pet” engineer. I venture to say, if they had spoken well of Mr. Mestayer we would not have heard them read.

The Mayor: I take it w»: want the' fullest information. ■ Cr. Sheridan ; "Would .you mind asking the Mayor of Nelson, who knows Mr. Jickoll, why ho did not employ him? ’ , ■ •- ■ • • Cr. Mann: I agree that .all information is valuable, but there is no question of drainage before us, and I don’t .see why it should bo brought up at this stage. • Cr. Bright: The correspondence is quite ex parte. The Mayor of Nelson only gives his own opinion, and the wires were not authorised by the Council. I would not dreftrh of sending wires like that, and tho Mayor of Nelson, Mr. Piper, might yet have to pay the piper for his opinion of. Mr. Mestayer. I move tho telegrams be not received. Cr. Wliinray: Tho'ftelograins wore sent because of .The' Jiekell controversy. - :■ U*' . ” Cr. Bright: Mr. Jiekell’s aniine does not come rip. It is a'direct attempt to discredit Mr. Mestayer. Cr. Mann: The Mayor has up right to introduce the correspondence . at the Council table. ■ Cr. Sheridan seconded the motion that tlie telegrams be not received. Cr. Darton: I aai quite prepared to. reeeivo all reports, hut 1 would like all .-reports on Mr. ’.Mestayer so that ave could set one against tho other. ■Cr. Pettie: It was indiscreet to send tlie telegrams, and it would ho indiscreet to receive them.

The motion that tlio telegrams be not received was carried by six votes to four. Later on, Cr. Darton asked if Mr. Morgan inquired into the drainage work at Palmerston North. The-Overseer said ho saw tlio. work, and thought it. fairly Satisfactory, although lie did not like the work at the outflow', which was considered most objectionable. 1 Cr. Darton asked 'if Mr. Morgan thought tlio same conditions applied to Gisborne as at Palmerston North. Mr. Morgan said he could not seo any similarity, as'Gisborne had a varictv of fall. Palmerston bad a natural fall, and could bo easily drained. Cr. Darton said that if the information had been -satisfactory, the Council would have had it; but as it was unsatisfactory it- had been withheld. • '.* The Mayor repudiated tlio assertion. After the general business of the Council was concluded.' tho notice of motion tabled by Cr. Wliinray, .“that the resolution , missed last evening cancelling Mr. Jiekell’s engagement he rescinded,” was /a lied uprtii. Cr. Wliinray asked leave to withdraw the- motion , and the , question dropped.