THE MAYOR IN EXPLANATION.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 983, 20 August 1877, Page 3

THE MAYOR IN EXPLANATION.

We have been requested to publish the following correspondence : Sir, —Will you kindly permit me through your columns to make a further explanation in reference to Mr Jameson’s letter re 2s rate. I must apologise in giving the wrong date in my previous explanation in the “Globe ” of the 17th instant. I stated therein that I received Mr Jameson’s letter on the 10th instant, but in doing so I did not myself refer to tho date on his letter, as it was laying at the Town Clerk’s office, but took the date that Mr Jameson received his reply from the newspapers, viz., the 10th, wdiereas he should have received it on the Bth, as I directed. I herewith give you a copy of letter which I received in reply, at my request, from the Town Clerk: — City Council Office, Christchurch, August 18th, 1877. Dear Mr Mayor,—ln reply to your request that I should explain what took place at the interview between yourself and Cr. Turner, I have pleasure in giving you the following explanation. On the Bth instant yourself and Cr. Turner were present in my office on matters connected with the employment of men out of work. Cr. Turner asked if a reply had been received from the Attorney-General re councillors going out of office, and on my replying in the negative, suggested that Cr. Hobbs should be communicated with, in order to obtain it, and he either drew or dictated the telegram for the purpose. He then left the office. Immediately afterwards I gave you Mr Jameson’s letter, which you opened, and directed me to sent a reply, which I did on the 10th instant. It must have been these occurrences taking place on the same day, and almost at the same time, that caused you to fall into the error in your letter to the “ Globe.” I have the honor to be, dear Mr Mayor, Youi’s truly, F. T. Haskins, Town Clerk. The Town Clerk’s letter will, therefore, show that Mr Jameson’s letter w r as actually received by me on the Bth instant, and the reply directed to be given to him at the same time, but it was not delivered until the 10th, which explains the error in the date referred to, I being under the impression that the reply was sent at once, according to my instructions. Now, Sir, according to telegraphic news in the papers, Mr Hobbs, with some other members of the Conference, waited upon the Premier in Wellington on tho Bth—tho same day that I replied to Mr Jameson’s letter. I think this will show that I was right in acting with caution in not allowing my name to appear on the first draft document that contained information of which I could not possibly have been in possession of at the time, and will also explain that, upon seeing Mr Jameson, I was unable to give that gentleman any other information than that which I did verbally, being a resume of the above first draft reply that was so much spoken of by the members of the City Council. Now, to the point, as to whether Cr. Turner saw Mr Jameson’s letter or not. I may say that my memory is as fresh as ever on’the subject, but as Cr. Turner and Mr Haskins are as likely to err as myself, I am willing to take my place with those gentlemen in tlic supposition that an error might possibly have occurred. But with my honour and integrity I will give place to no man. By excusing me for again troubling you I shall be greatly obliged. Yours, &e.,. Jas. Gapes.