THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE COUNCIL.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IV, Issue 133, 9 June 1869, Page 2

THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THE COUNCIL.

To hie Editor op the Nelson Evening Mail. Sik — The action taken by his Honor the Superintendent on proroguing the Council has been characterised by your mild and pacific contemporary the Colonist as "insulting to every constituency of the province," his language being " intemperate, insulting and unconstitutional." and also in a letter signed •' J. W. Barnicoat" (of whom I shall have a word to say)j as being guilty of "indulging in abusive language" " neither warrantable by evidence nor by good manners" towards the members of the Council — that lie "exhibited execrable taste in summoning a meeting of the electors, and that it would have been more fair, if while trying his own powers of snubbing * * * he had * * given them an opportunity of testing their own" — and, "the strange and unprecedented prorogation speech * * was a meet preface, in more official language to the less guarded language of the speech to the electors on Friday." Now, Sir, I have been amongst the electors a good deal and have not heard one word of condemnation but a great deal of commendation. When the Superintendent prorogued the Council and stated his opinion officially he knew that the Council were fettered and unable to reply — but with a courtesy unlookcd for, gave the much insulted Council an opportunity to defend themselves, by using the same language (Mr. i!arnicoat says in a less guarded manner) to them at a public meeting called by him. Why did not these insulted gentlemen defend themselves ? Answer : They could "not 5" (please don't leave out the little word). But what do we find they can do ! They take the more '"execrable" and unseemly course of vilifying his Honor behind his back. What greater evidence can we require, to prove tbe weakness and incapacity of these "insulted" representatives than their inability to reply to the charges made by his Honor in such good plain English. Surely if his language was less guarded at the meeting the more open was he to reply. Again, in the Colonist our attention is directed to a letter in which it is stated as something very wrong, that our Superintendent, while attending the Assembly in Wellington, will, besides his salary, draw his honorarium for the three months while there. If that is wrong, what shall we say of our Speaker, Mr. Barnicoat, who has for some years past received a salary of ,£2OO for duties as Speaker, and has drawn his pay or honorarium as country member. If it is wrong in the Superintendent, is it right in the Speaker of the Council? And, again, I cannot help thinking there has been some considerably strong pulling of secret strings in the late Council. On May 11 th we find Mr. Wastney moves "That the Speaker be authorised to have the volumes of the Acts and Ordinances of the General Legislature and of this Province examined, with a view to distinguishing in some convenient and prominent manner, those which are repealed (either wholly or partially) by subsequent legislation, and those which are still in operation." Motion agreed to. Why Mr. Wastney should be so exceedingly anxious on this pomt — indeed how it ever should have entered his head, struck me as surprising, but on examining the phraseology of the above motion, I came to the conclusion that it originated with, and was dictated by Mr. Barnicoat. On .enquiry, I find that Mr. Barniooat is to undertake this Herculean task, will lie, I should like to know consider himself sufficiently remunerated for his work by his salary as Speaker? Or will it be the means of placing an additional sum in his pocket? If so, will the Colonist consider it part of its duty to call public attention to the fact? I would also remind your readers that the third paragraph of His Honor's prorogation speech, having reference to the reductions made by him, remains as yet unanswered by the " insulted " Council. I am, &c, Electob.