THE MAYOR IN REPLY.

Patea Mail, Volume VIII, Issue 1012, 21 March 1883, Page 2

THE MAYOR IN REPLY.

TO THE EDITOR. Slß,—Jn your last issue there appears two epistles, one signed “ Gian Aber,” the other R. A. Adams, each containing ,a paragraph on municipal business issued in such a way as to make it appear they were not written by the same person. Such is not my belief, and by your leave, I desire to make a short reply in one—to both. “Gian’s” reflections on the action of the Mayor re drain tiles have been of late before the public in so many ways that all public interest therein must be by this time lost. I shall not therefore endeavour to convince anyone against their will and leave matters as stated at the Council meetings, and to what “ Gian” terras the “ original cause ” (I suppose of his grievance), which, he says, occurred some four or five months ago in Cr Milroy giving an order to Mr Dale for L2B worth of kerbing timber under the powers of the Works Committee (Cr Adams being a member), and that he also procured the Council’s cheque for payment to Mr Dale of said timber without any reference to Council, If so, that says very little for Cr Adams as a councillor in allowing Cr Milroy to do as he has a mind with the Borough fund. The statement that the Council, including the ex-Mayor, forgave Cr Milroy on condition that he was not to do it again, is rather too weak. Now, Sir, I think “ Gian” wants some information about these kerbing contracts placed before the public, and, with your permission, I shall be as brief as possible. First let me state that there has not been any kerbing timber ordered by the Works Committee, or any person connected with the Council since the Borough formation. Any kerbing put down has been by contract, the contractors finding all materials, and the only contract in which Mi; Dale’s name appears was one let to Messrs Kendall and Bush, when after a portion had been executed, the clerk received ah order from contractors to, make all future payments on account of said contract to Mr Dale. The Engineer supervised and measured the work, and, when completed forwarded a certificate to the clerk,in the name of Kendall and Bush that they were entitled to receive all payments then owing. The specifications provided that the work would be taten over when completed and payment made in terms of contract. A cheque was written out and presented to Councillors Taplin and Milroy for signature in the usual way. Ratepayers now have before them what “ Gian ” terms “the original cause”’ R. A. Adams in his paragraph headed “An Explanation ” refers to Leicester street ns follows :—“My action in the Borough Council is only obstructive when jobs and useless expenditure of money to suit one or two councillors are carried out, such as the Leicester street affair, expending in great haste large amounts of public money on a street with no inhabitants and fancy gutters at L 6 15s per chain.” Now should the residents in Leicester street ever desire to pay a special compliment to any councillor in advocating the carrying out of the above works that honour belongs to Cr Adams; for on page 106 of the Council’s Minute book there appears the following motion ; “Moved by Cr Adams, and seconded by Cr Aitclnson, “ That tenders be called for works in Leicester street as per specifications, tenders to be in in one month from accepting tenders for Bedford street.” The specifications alluded to in above resolutions provided for asphalt side channelling on both sides, as directed and approved of by the Engineer. The centre of street formation was to be gravelled the whole length, 18 feet wide, which if at that time carried out, would have increased the largo expenditure spoken of by £IOO, and also 280 drain tiles. But an amendment, moved by Cr Sherwood and seconded by Cr Milroy, that the gravelling of Leicester street be held over, was carried, and Cr Adams’ motion ns amended was adopted at a full meeting of Council, without division. Again, on the 23rd October, the Council accepted the tender of Messrs Gordon and O’Hara for works in Leicester street, ns advertised, without opposition ; present, nil Councillors excepting Cr Aitchison. That tender had a schedule of prices attached, showing kerbing nr, £3 6s and channelling at £3 9s per chain. Where then may I ask was Cr Adams ?—at the Council table assisting to his utmost in carrying out these jobs and large useless expenditure and fancy gutters. Should ho not take to himself the advice he so freely gives “ Factotum That if he desires to make liis mark in politics, he ought to ho certain of the truth of his statement.” Further on under the same heading the writer says the Loan has been pawned and that if the ex-mayor had not been removed from office this course would not have been necessary. Such is his opinion. Cr Adams must have liad his eye to business when writing this. I have had as muchHo do, with this Loan as any other councillor in office, but it never struck me to call at the house over the way under the sign of tho “Three Balls ” before going elsewhere. Local institutions if found profitable and. properly conducted are worthy of support.—Yours, &c. John Milroy. Patea, 21st March 1883.