WATERWORKS INVESTIGATION COMMITTEE.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXIII, Issue 5282, 28 February 1878, Page 3

WATERWORKS INVESTIGATION COMMITTEE.

This committee met yesterday afternoon at four o’clock, iii the Mayor’s room of the Conned Chamber. Present : Councillors Hunter (chairman), Diver, Fisher, and Logan. The minutes of the previous meeting having been read and confirmed, the Chairman stated that the only question was the consideration of the committee’s report, the evidence having been all taken and printed. Councillor Fishek observed that everything had evidently been very ingeniously arranged for getting the report closed. He had a letter he wished to read, which he thought should be incorporated as part of the proceedings. The Chairman observed that ho could not listen to any such remarks being made, as it was distinctly understood by the committee that the report should be closed and printed. That being the case, he did not think that the letter could be considered as being before the meeting. Councillor Fishek observed that the committee’s shorthand reporter had been allowed to make certain statements. The Chairman stated he did not see how be could allow such matters to bo reopened again. He considered it would bo improper at that stage to allow anything to be said about Mr. Crombio, the inquiry not being one either about that gentleman or Councillor Fisher, but one of public importance to the city. However, as chairman, he would leave the question for the decision of the committee, of which be was only a member like Councillor Fisher him.-elf. (Councillor Macdonald here joined the meeting.) Councillor Diver thought it was only fair to allow Councillor Fisher to read his letter, which lie understood was merely a reply to statements made by Mr. Crombie, and which were included in the minutes ; especially if Councillor Fisher was not aware that the inquiry was to be closed. Councillor Logan having expressed his consent to the letter being read, that course was agreed to. Councillor FISHEH then read the letter—a very lengthy document —which went iuto minute details, with the view of contradicting manv of the allegations made against him in altering portions of the evidence given before the committee. During the reading he several times observed that he would pass over certain portions if they were at ail offensive to the chairman, who thereupon stated that he did not wish to be considered in the matter at all, as he had only been fulfilling a public duty, the same as any other member of the committee, and had nothing in the shape of private interests to serve.

The letter being concluded, Councillor Diver stated that he thought it was only fair to have it appended to the report, or else the other letter written by Mr. Crombie should be struck but. The Chairman observed that the difficulty which had at first presented itself to him was the fact that Mr. Crombie, not being a member of the committee, but merely in their employ as a shorthand writer, could not reply to the attack made upon him by any other means than by writing the letter, which had been accordingly printed with the proceedings. That had been agreed on, and it was then thought that the matter would have been allowed to drop, and especially so as Councillor Fisher had the opportunity of replying at the time, hut did not think proper to do so. In fact, Mr. Crombie, who was then present, had heard Councillor Fisher’s letter read, which was couched in offensive terms, and he was again debarred from making a reply. Councillor Fisher observed that portions of the report had appeared in the New Zealand Times.

The CHAIRMAN stated that the last speaker wellknewhehimself had admitted at the private meeting of the committee having been guilty of a most improper proceeding, and had even agreed that the alterations made by him should be expunged. Councillor Fisher had further stated he was very sorry for what he had done, and had agreed to allow the whole of the evidence to revert back to its former condition. He (the chairman) was sorry to have to allude to what bad been decided at any private meeting, but he could not help, it. He had pointed it out at the time, and Councillor Fisher was well aware of the fact, as a professional shorthand writer himself, that if the matter had been taken before the Supreme Court Mr. Crombie’s notes would bave been taken as evidence, as bad already been frequently decided. Councillor MACDONALD stated that when he saw the alterations in the evidence he felt excessively annoyed. He, in consequence, at once spoke to Mr. Crombie, who suggested the propriety *of letting the matter stand, over until the public had left the committee-room. As a matter of fact, however, the alterations were by no means trivial, or merely effected for embellishment, as had been set forth by Councillor Fisher. In fact Councillor Fisher had admitted that all the questions put to him (Councillor Macdonald) had been carefully committed to manuscript before being asked, and under those circumstances, the alterations in the questions, after the replies were recorded, boro a highly suspicious appearance, and tended to prove what had been freely asserted, that the inquiry was simply a means for the gratification of Councillor Fisher’s private animus against certain parties. Still, in the face of all that. Councillor Fisher had stated he had done nothing, although at the private meeting he had admitted being guilty of a highly improper proceeding. He (Councillor Fisher) had no right to malign the officer employed by them ; he should rather, instead of taking the part of a partisan in regard to the proceedings, have adopted, he might say, the position of a judge in the matter. Councillor Fisher observed that he had proposed Councillor Macdonald as one of the committee, although he well knew him in the light of a personal enemy—a fact which he thought hardly showed him to he wishing to act the part of a partisan. Councillor Macdonald replied that such was not the case, as the names of the committee had been furnished by his Worship the Mayor, *o that Councillor Fisher need not pretend to have acted the magnanimous part by any means. Councillor Logan (ffiaerved that the letter read by Councillor Fisher contained some very strong remarks, and Mr. Crombie again had no opportunity of replying. The Chairman stated that was the difficulty which had presented itself to him, in allowing the proceedings to be re-opened after the inquiry had been closed. After some remarks from Councillor Diver, it was then agreed that Councillor Fisher’s letter should be incorporated with the report. Mr. Crombie stated that he was very anxious to be allowed the opportunity replying to the statements made by Councillor Fisher, but it was ruled that he could not do bo, as he was not a member of the cammittee. Councillor Logan observed that in that case he thought it would be better to have Mr. Crorabie’s letter expunged from the report, and then Councillor Fisher’s need not appear. The Chairman ruled that such a course could not be adopted after the resolution they had just arrived at. The proceedings then closed for the consideration of the report in committee. ”