TUAKAU TOWN BOARD

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 8, Issue 484, 25 November 1919, Page 3

TUAKAU TOWN BOARD

Special Meeting. Smeed's Contract. A special meeting of the Tuakau Town Board was held on Friday night to consider the reply received from the Auditor General with regard to the complaint made by McMungall to him relative to Smeed's contract. Present: Messrs Dynes Fluton (chairman) Jas. Pirret, W. Barnaby, B. Geraghty, C. Finch, Geo. Lapwoid, J M. Mungall and the clerk (Mr A H. Tapper.) The Auditors General's letter read as follows:

Be Contract Question: "I have duly perused the several statements in this matter aod have come to the conclusion, that the conditions under which the contract was entered unto and carried out are too confused and complex for a reliable judgment to be based on the written statements of either or both parties, to the present dispute; although it is obvious some phases of the transactions have certainly been irregular. To ascertain the true position would require personal examination of the opposing parties which it is clearly 110 function of minj to undertake. 1 therefore repeat the re commendation lately wired to y.m to con-nit an expert leqal adviser, placing the whole of the facts before him; and my action with regard tu the matter will be goverened to the extent laid down by the Public Revenues Act by the decision your lawyer anivos at. A copy of this letter is being sent to Mr Mungall as in effect, my reply to his representations on the subject " (Signed). M. J. Collins, Auditor General. The letter was discussed at length, the argument at times being somewhat heated. During the c urse thereof Mr Firret accused Mr Mungall of taking before the meeting a coyp of the letter and submitting it the Tuakau Press for publication. Mr Mungall denied the allegation. In accordance with notice of motion given, Mr Mungall moved that the whole of the facts in connexion with Mr Smeed's contract be placed before the Municipal Association for its opinion. The chairman asked Mr Mung*ll if by the above motions he referred that the whole of the facts had not been placed before the Auditor General. Mr Mungall replied that in his opinion the whole of facts had not betn submitted to the Auditor General, but would not state what particulars in his opinion had been suppressed The chairman then stated that the letter which hud bf en forwarded to the Auditor General had been passed by the Board, as a full and correct statement of all [.uticulara of the contract He therefore refused to accept the motion as being insullent to the chair, and to the Board. Mr firret then moved that the letter be received. Seconded by Mr Barnaby and Carried. Messrs Lapwood and Mungall voting in the negative.