NETHERTON SCHOOL ELECTIOIN.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 4982, 2 June 1926, Page 3

NETHERTON SCHOOL ELECTIOIN.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—lt is not my desire to enter into this controversy, but I am compelled to make a public explanation in answer to ‘‘Con’s” letter. His information must have been very unreliable, or he has got hopelessly mixed up with a simple; transaction which his mental faculties could, not grasp. The position is as follows: In or about the month of January, 1924, my committee decided to apply to the Education Board asking it to install a septic tank sanitary system. The Inspector of Health advised us to find some of the finance towards .the cost. This was discussed a,t a full meeting of the committee, the secretary and I strongly objecting to the committee being mulcted in any way, and it was decided not to coptribute tej the cost of erection. After much correspondence and time Mr Stembridge was asked to interview the inspector, who again advised the committee to contribute, something towards the cost. The question was again brought before the committee. The meeting was not foil, but they decided to contribute £3O towards the erection of motor 'and pump. After the work had been completed, we weye reminded of our obligation to the board, and 1 then put myp roposal. to the committee, who supported me in that we should approach our member, Mr A- M. Samuel, and ask him to use his best endeavour to get the committee relieved of the obligation. The secretary and I were in Paeroa on committee business, and we interviewed the Mayor as to the whereabouts of Mr Samuel. We were informed that Mr Samuel was in Wellington, and we would be notified when he returned to Paeroa,. Some time later the Ratepayers’ Association decided to ask Mr Samuel to visit Netherton, and my committee appointed the secretary and me as a deputation to meet Mr Samuel and put our case before him. Mr Samuel; undertook to help us in very way he could, and I 0 pleased to say he was successful. Some time elapsed before we heard from Mr Samuek and the annual election was drawing near. However, just prior to the election I received from Mr Samuel an envelope containing two letters—one a private letter to Mr Samuel from ,the Education Board and the other a letter from Mr Samuel t.o the. chairman of the school committee. Mr Samuel's letter informed me that he ha,d been successful in his mission; otherwise, I had received no official information (concerning this money) from the Education Board. On the night of the election I put this letter in my pocket 'for the purpose of handing it over to the secretary to be dealt with in the usual way. The question asked during the meeting was, in the first place, wholly irrelevant; secondly, it was not asked by the president of. the Ratepayers’ Association, but by Mr P. Harold; thirdly, in my opinion it was asked in an irrelevant manner. And the question was, “'Mr Chairman, have you got any information about that £3O? I think the householders would like to hear it.” 1 Why Mr Harold conceived the idea that the householders would like to hear it i? beyond my comprehension, because very few of the householders knew anything about it, as can be seen by “Con’s” garbled statements. It wa.s entirely a committee master, to be dealt with by the com,mittee. There was no hesitation on my part, and no obvious reason for hesitation; nor does the president of the Ratepayers’ Association enter into this at all—he has beep instrumental in getting nothing for the school with the exception that he took the business of the school committee (against iny wishes) to a meeting of the ratepayers to obtain 10 yards of su.nd for the school. The books and correspondence held by the committee will prove the truth of my statements, and all “Con’s” bluff and flippant abuse does, not deceive anyone, nor hide his true nature. I will not make any further reply to "Con” or any other person, as that would be tantamount, to lowering myself to his level. The attitude taken up at the election I need not comment upon, as it has been clearly and, truthfully portrayed by "Householder.” C. H. POTTER, Late Chairman of Committee.

Sir, —As a member of the Netherton School Committee I wish to protest against the attitude adopted hy the three members who have signed themselves “For .the Netftertoh School Committee.” I have up. quarrel with their decision in trying' to defend .the committee;, because it is the duty of every school committee to be honest and upright in all their dealings, and also to defend their honour when any aspersion is oa.st against .them. My objection is based on the fact that these three members have gone to the Press without first having discussed the matter before a full committee. I do not even know whether this matter was discussed at the last committee meeting, because I was not there, the reason being that I received a notice on the 17th hist. to attend a meeting on the 14th, but which took place on the 21st. These three men had the opportunity of asking my advice or opinion before going to the Press, but it was made apparent that my collaboration was not desired. Had they done so it would have given me the greatest pleasure in advising them not to show their hand, or, in other words, take no notice, because anything which was, nauseous to them, no matter in what form it may exist, would not smell any sweeter by stirring it up. When going to the Press the best possible course is to stick to the truth, and nothing but the truth. But in their anxiety to reply to “Householder” they have made, a statement which I take exception to. They state tha,t when Mr Prout nominated Mr Potter and me a member of the old committee seconded the domination. That statement is absolutely false. On that occasion I whs particularly alert. Why ? Mr Potter asked Mr Prout if there was a seconder,

and the reply was “No, there was no seconder.” It was only after the; second spasm, as outlined by “Householder,” that they found a seconder. R. ADAM, Late Secretary of Committee.