IN REPLY TO MR KENAH.

Patea Mail, Volume V, Issue 448, 30 July 1879, Page 3

IN REPLY TO MR KENAH.

(To the Editor of the Patea Mail.) Bib, —I noticed in your issue of the 26th instant, a letter signed : “ J. W. Kenah,” by which the writer seems to have taken to heart the lailure of the public meeting which was called for Monday, the 21st instant, and of which he was oho of the promoters. Sir Kenah appears to impute the failure of the publi c meeting to the fact that another meeting

was held on the same evening, viz., of Town HnlJ Directors, and indulges in a sneer at them and their proceedings. Mr Ken ah has made the very common mistake of writing about that of which he knows nothing. As he is not a shared)older, and not in any way interested in the Company, he is of coarse entirely unacquainted with the nature of the business with which they were occupied. I may state for his information that the meeting of Directors was convened before the public meeting was thought of, and the contractors were in attendance to sign the contract, and arrange other matters in connection with the work. The meeting of Directors was called for 7 p.m., the public meeting at 8, and the Directors expected to have finished their business in time to attend the public meeting. Several matters, however, cropped up which had to be determined, and the consequence was that the public meeting was concluded before the business was disposed of. I offer this explanation solely for Mr Kenah’s benefit, and would inform him that the Directors were as much interested in the object of the meeting as he himself was, bntthey could not inconvenience others, and neglect that trust reposed in them by the shareholders, unless under exceptional circumstances. How Mr Kenah can connect their absence with t c failure of the meeting, is a mystery. He says there are 300 ratepayers in the district, and that only a dozen settlers and five small boys attended the meeting. Now, the Directors’ meeting, all told, only numbered eight individuals. I would ask him, would their presence have made the meeting a success, as his letter implies that their absence was the cause of the failure. The Directors no doubt will feel complimented by the high opinion entertained .of them—uuiuteixlion ally expressed, however, by the writer, whilst intending to chastise them for the neglect of their duties as settlers. That a certain amount of carelessness exists about public matters, cannot be denied. The Town Hall Directors, however, are the last against whom such a charge should be brought, as they are always to the fore when public or local matters are to be considered.—l am, &c.,

H. F. MASON. Waverloy, July 2Sth, 1879. o (To the Editor of the Patea Mail.) Sin, —I see by to-day!s issue of the Patea Mail, a letter signed by J. W. Kenuh, complaining of the wretched attendance of the settlers at a meeting held in the Town Hall last Monday evening, to consider what steps should be taken with respect to Native Affairs and railway works, and to urge the Government to arm the Volunteers with efficient weapons. Mr Ketiair seems to think that the settlers take very little interest in the welfare of the district. I- agree with him to a certain extent, but at the same time I don’t consider that the poor attendance at the meeting held last Monday evening is any proof of a want of public spirit in the district, for I do not believe there were twenty settlers who knew of a meeting having been called. As far as I can learn, a notice was written and signed by Mr Ken ah and two or three others, and posted on one of the stores three days previous to that of the meeting. Now, sir, I believe that the settlers take a great deal of interest in the construction of the railway through the county, and the settlement of the native difficulty, and I think that if the gentlemen calling the meeting had taken the trouble to advertise it in the local paper, which has a good circulation in the district, or to have put up notices in different parts of the township a fortnight previous, to the meeting being held, the Hall would have been crowded. —-I am, &c. SETTLER. Waverley, July 26th, 1879.