CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 14 January 1921, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

RE INGLEWOOD COUNTY COJgfCIL. (To the Editor.) Sir, —When reading your report in this morning’s paper on the above meeting at which the difference between chairman and clgrk 1 was discussed, I thought ?t singular that no councillor expressed a desire to settle the matter from the standpoint of right, but took the stupid course of siding with the more useful man, probably on the grounds of expediency. The treatment of the clerk, appears to me, as ah impartial reader, to be unfair, as he was approve# by all who spoke (I have only contempt for those wjio voted against him and did not speak), and yet was dismissed from the service of the council, the only apparent reason being that the services of the chairman might be retained, right or wrong. This is not British fair play, and I have no doubt that the Inglewood people will demand justice.—l am, etc., HAWERA READER.

CGUNTY CLERK AND CHAIRMAN. (To the Editor.) Sir, —I hve read in your issue of today the report of the disagreement between the county chairman and myself, and that it is stated that we could not agree. ' May I, in justice to myself, explain that the particular matter of which the chairman complains, and alleges is the cause of the trouble, was fully discussed in council at the meeting in October, and that the majority of the council upheld my action, as I know that every county clerk in the Dominion will do. Several councillors expressed the opinion at the time that these complaints were the outcome of prejudice. The matter was again referred to the following meeting on November 1, when a motion for my dismissal was moved, but an amendment against the motion was carried. At that meeting other charges were made against me, as before, which I not only refuted but placed definite evidence on the table for the council’s inspection, which disproved the complaints. After the amendment was carried I then expressed the hope that there would be no further trouble, and although I had been at both meetings, subjected to the grossest of insults and charges, for the withdrawal of which I asked, I therefore before the whole council expressed a willingness to forget these insults and grossly unfair complaints, and to extend the right hand of fellowship as an earnest of goodwill, but the qhairman refused to shake hands, stating: “No, I never will.” From that time he refused to speak to me, not only in the office but outside, and that has been his attitude for the past four months or more. I?rom this I think ratepayers and the public will see that it is not a case of could not, but would not agree, and that the unpleasantness is not of my making. No reference has been made of these points in the reports of these two meetings, but as the matter has now become public property I think it is due, and only just to myself that ratepayers and the public should know that I have done all in my power to avoid unpleasantness, but without avail. Of other charges and complaints which have been made, and the justice or otherwise of the council’s action, .1 do not intend to say anything at this juncture, as the matter is being placed in other hands. lam confident, however, that the ratepayers will at least now realise what I have endured for §ome months whilst I have been working constantly late hours, underpaid and overworked, and that such treatment will not meet with their approval.—l am. etc., FRED LLOYD, County Clerk. Inglewood County