The Nelson Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1878.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XIII, Issue 44, 20 February 1878, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1878.

In another column we publish a letter from a correspondent relative to Mr Gray'B resignation of his seat in the Council. It is to be regretted that, owing to the attempt; to identify the reporter who supplied us with the account or the meeting at which Mr Gray made such unfair charges against |a public officer, and acted generally in so petulant and indiscreet a manner, the personal element has been so largely iutroduced into the discussion, as it has been tbe means of throwing a cloud of dust over what is the i real question at issue, which is— whether a Councillor, who is dissatisfied with the conduct of a servant of the Council, is justified in making accusations of the grossest kind agaiust him, and, immediately it is proposed to bring him face to face with the maligned individual, hurriedly leaving the Chamber, and declining to take part in any enquiry into the truth of his libellous allegations. This extraordinary conduct of Mr Gray's was immediately followed by his resignation, aud had he stopped here we should have considered that he had done the correct thing, as he had clearly proved himself fco be wanting in fchat judgment and discretion which are essential in one to whom are entrusted such large and important interests as those of a municipality like Nelson. But he again seek* to be elected to the seat which he vacated iu a fit of temper, and it remains to be seen whether the ratepayers are prepared to endorse conduct so extraordinary as that by which Mr Gray voluntarily closed upon himself the door of the Council Chamber. With reference to the letter before us there is one paragraph which we cannot allow to pass unnoticed. The writer says that he thinks he is " fairly entitled to characterise the report" (which was published inourissue of the 9th inst.) "as a malevolent peaversion of facts." In plainer language he recuses our reporter of telling a deliberate lie. The gentleman to whom we are indebted for the report in questiou having left Nelson, we should be doing him a gross injustice were we to allow such a statement to pass unchallenged, and the best way to I refute it is to republish an extract from our report of the Council's proceedings on JFriI day night last. The attention of the Council having been called by a letter from Mr Lightfoot to the charges made against him by Mr Gray, "Cr Everett said that such an accusation had certainly been made, and he wished to state that the report which appeared in the Mail a few nights ago was entirely correct. He desired to take this opportunity of bearing testimony to the truthfulness of the report because he had heard that Jit had been called in question.— Cr. Little also spoke as to the correctness of the report, and said that Cr. Gray had told him the next day that he did not mean to say what he had said. That was the only extenuating circumstance in connection with the affair that he knew of.— Cr. Levien thought that the reporter had let Cr. Gray down very easily. — Cr. Hooper fully endorsed what had fallen from Cr. Everett with reference to the report.—On the motion of Cr. Hooper seconded by Cr, Little it was unanimously resolved, That this Council js of opinion that the imputation of dishonesty made against the City Surveyor by Cr. Gray was entirely unfounded and unwarranted." Does our correspondent seriously mean to aver that gentlemen of such stauding iu the town - j Messrs Everett, Little, Levien, and Hooper arc also— well, we will adopt; tho milder words used in the letter -<- malevolent peryerters of facts ? Yet, if his charge against our reporter be true it is equally applicable to those whom we have named. A\ e really caunot help thinking that, like MiGray, "Principiis Obsta" does not mean what he says, and we sincerely trust thafc he will take the earliest opportunity of doiug thnt Avhich the ;ex-Councillor should have done long ago; iu other words, that he will explain that he had unintentionally made use of language of which he did not fully unders iand thc purport, and state that upon its meaning beiug pointed oufc to him he is desirous of expressing his unfeigned sorrow at having so far Lransgressed the bounds of courtesy and even of common decency.