CORRESPONDENCE.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1360, 25 September 1883, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

V. r o do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinion* expressed by our correspondents]. —;o; A BROKEN PROMISE. TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —Some month* ago, your contemporary the “ Herald ” published a long letter, signed “ Common, Shelton & Co,” descriptive of their claim against the Harbor Board and Borough Council. In a subsequent issue of the same journal is announceu the receipt of a telegram from Cr Tucker to the effect—“ I have just seen Messrs Common and Shelton’s letter in your paper—l trust your readers will not be misled thereby—On k my return I will be able to show that many f statements therein are erroneous.—Please publish this.—W. H. Tucker.” Has our conscientious Councillor quite forgotten his promise, or han he purposely broken his pledged word, or was the publication of the telegram only a canard on the part of the “ Herald,” or had it suddenly flashed across the mind of that most astute gentleman that the catalistic words W. H. Tucker, are to be found affixed to that most brilliant effort of diplomancy and financing skill of yclept—- “ The Common-eum-Shelton agreement,” or does he intend taking a “ brief” from the opposition, and electrifying the inhabitants by a display of his forensic knowledge, acumen, and high class oratory in support of the claims advanced by Shelton <x Co.—l trust not—l hope not—for consistency sake don’t do it Tucker—dont do it—remember dear boy, this question has already cost one | Councillor the loss of his seat at the Council Board, a gentleman with whom it was hard | to part, how much more so in your case, • imagine the lacerated and agonised feelings of the ratepavers if they have to part with their dear Tucker, and don’t do it dear boy —don’t do it is the advice of, Yours, You know, you Know.