Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

Wake Up, Clevedon!

! To the Editor | Sir-In the "Times" of the 2nd inst, Mr Luke has a letter, that is "so like the Board," bluffing Rip Van Winkle. Mr Luke said he was "prepared to answer any charges" about the Board. In my innocence I thought here we have a well of wisdom, let me loam. So I asked a few questions. But, lo! Mr Luke does his usual crab-like side s'epping and instead of releasing his accumulated wisdom takes the trouble to attack his opinion to my character. Now. I wish to point out to Mr Luke that the public does not care two straws about his opinion of my character. But the ratepayers are entitled to enquire how their money goes. A civil question is entitled to a civil answer. The questions I have asked have all been asked by numbers of ratepayers. Now, Mr Editor, with your permission, I will elaborate one or two, so that the public and the ratepayers can judge who is the incompetent. Number one question : Is it true the Brown's bridge extras cost as much as the original contract Let me explain the bridge in question is a paltry little one span thing a pack of school boys could erect without overstraining their intelligences. Yet it is freely asserted that the extras cost more than, the original contract. Question two, about altering the specifications. It is freely asserted that after the contract was made the specifications were altered at a increase of cost. Were the local bodies concerned so lacking iu regard for public interests that they did not care how things were muddled ? If so they should get out of their positions. Now, Mr Luke, I have given you a lead. Just be good euough to answer the other questions civily, or be convicted of being a bluffer—never mind your opinion of my character. Mr Luke winds up his letter by kindly saying I am "not likely to be taken seriously." But, Mr Luke, if you had stopped to think, remember I first officially moved to get a road into your district against opposition, and you have it, so somebody must have taken me seriously. I first moved ofliciaily to get a school into your district and you have it. I first moved to form tho Farmers' Union ; you and thousands of others belong to it 1 will admit it took you years to see its value, but that is a reflection on your intelligence, not on me. And so on, and so on. Beiug spring time I think I am entitled to wind up with a poetic quotaion, •'Blow, blow, thou winter wind Thou art not so unkind As man's ingratitude." 1 am, etc, SAM. A. BK'JWNE. Clevedon, 0/10/17

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PWT19171012.2.4.1

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 6, Issue 318, 12 October 1917, Page 1

Word count
Tapeke kupu
459

Wake Up, Clevedon! Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 6, Issue 318, 12 October 1917, Page 1

Wake Up, Clevedon! Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 6, Issue 318, 12 October 1917, Page 1

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert