CR. FREDRIC IN DEFENCE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXV, Issue 87, 15 April 1915, Page 3

CR. FREDRIC IN DEFENCE.

[To The Editor Stratford Post.] Sir, —My reasons for objecting to the discussion of the plans at the ordinary Council meeting were as follows: The Council set up a committee to deal with the plans, etc.. and to report, and also resolved that the plans remain on the table for three full days, and that a special meeting woutd then be called to discuss any suggestions and finally adopt the plans. Had this course been followed out our ordinary business would have heen finished on Monday and a special meeting called for Tuesday or Wednesday. However, the Council wished to alter the ordinary meeting into a special without the usual notice being given. i would point out here that through this course being adopted Cr. King, whose services were of special value in this matter, were lost to the ratepayers. I still believe that notice was necessary to rescind the calling of the special meeting before the Council could discuss the plans, etc. The most important reason given for altering the usual course was to prevent delay and loss of two to three pounds per day as urged by one of the Councillors. In reply to this statement, 1 wish to say that the architect had two sets of plans, and he advised the Council that he required threo'days more to complete other two sets before he could call for tenders. In the face of this information, I assert there wars no need for the Council to alter their former decision or to rush this business through. Regarding my absence' from the adjournment of a special meeting, I need not touch on that except to say your reporter neglected to report the Mayor's apology to me for his remarks in reference to my absence. I feel that the spending of £9OOO, and the erection of this building is a matter that requires Careful inquiry and thought from every Councillor, and that the taking of a few days extra in this connection is time well spent.—l am, etc., J. FREDRIC. Stratford, April 14, 1915.. ''

(Our reporter states that the Mayor's apology to Cr. Fredru had ; not the slightest reference to Mis absence from the adjournment of tlv special meeting, but to the fact tha' earlier in the evening, th Mayor had inadvertently statethat Cr. Fredric was absen from "two" meetings (not one) o the committee. Further, as far a our readers are concerned, the re port made no reference to th Mayor's first statement and therefon there was no occasion to report tha' lie had apologised for same.—Ed. Stratford Evening Post).