The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, JANUARY 10, 1884. TEMUKA ROAD BOARD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1124, 10 January 1884, Page 2

The Temuka Leader THURSDAY, JANUARY 10, 1884. TEMUKA ROAD BOARD.

Worse and worse the Temuka Road Board is getting. AH sense of selfrespect seems to have left it, and nothing but the proverbial bear gar fen remains. Last Tuesday the examination of witness lasted a great part of the day, the result of which will be found in another column. When the accounts were being discussed Mr Quinn got so disgusted that he left the room and he was soon followed by Mr Paterson. This left only Messrs Barker and Austin, and as it takes three to form a quorum they could do no business, There they remained for about an hour, until piteous petitions reached Mr Quinn to come back and pass the cheques for the men. Mr Quinn did this, and the remainder of the business was not dealt with. During the time that there was not a quorum present, however, Mr Barker thought fit to accept and pass over to the reporters the Overseer’s report,containing a statement reflecting upon the accuracy of the statements made by Mr Twomey at last meeting. Passing over the impropriety of this we shall deal with Mr Sinclair’s statement. He says that the Temuka Leader has received for work ordered by himself from the Ist of April to the Ist of December £37 15s, while the Timaru Herald has received £23 3s. We have, received £37 14s 9d, so Mr Sinclair was only 3d out. But the work was not all ordered by Mr Sinclair. There was a sum of £1 12s 3d coming to us when Mr Sinclair took office, and work to the vaule of £5 8s 9d was ordered by Mr W ills in connection with the elections- That is £ll Is of the sum named, which was not ordered by Mr Sinclair at all, although he says it was. There was also £8 for printing, which we got by tender in competition with the Timaru Herald. But we never complained of not having received fair play previous to the August meeting. It is since then that we have had reason to complain. He says that wo have received £8 2s 9d since August against the Herald’s £8 Bs. We

should like to know whether there is anything still due to the Herald, It is possible there is £2O still due to the Herald. But we must tell Mr Sinclair that of the £8 2s 9d there was £2 of it due before the August meeting, and that £2 8s is charged for advertising the road on the Arowhenua estate. Over this Mr Sinclair had no control, as he was bound by law to advertise it for 8 weeks, and had instructions from the Board to do so, There was also an advertisement inserted in this paper that he was specially instructed not to insert in the Timaru Herald, and this came to 11s 3d. Putting then the £2 that was due before the August meeting with the -£2 8s for the Arowhenua road, and' the 11s 3d for the advertisement he was ordered not to inseit in the Herald, we get £4 19s 3d, which if deducted from £8 2s 9d will leave only £3 3s 6d. In this sura there was a rate notice which had to be inserted three times, and re small birds nuisance five times, both coming to Ll 4s. These Mr Sinclair had to advertise specially, and consequently could not beep them from us, so wo do not thank him for them. This reduces the sum to Ll 19s 6d for contract advertisements. What we complained of was that previous to the August meeting he was giving three insertions of contract advertisements, and that after that, because of the dispute between up, he gave us only two insertions. We also complained that he took the printing to Timaru to Mr Hutton and the Sooth Canterbury Times and did not give us a chance of tendering for it, although our tender was the lowest on the previous occasion. We can prove these two charges, and until Mr Sinclair can disprove them it would be better for him to hold his tongue. We would willingly do so if ho would only let us alone. After the proceedings of last Tuesday we have sufficient material to write on if we wanted to “ go ” fir him, but we refrain from doing so. We would willingly let him alone if he would let us alone, but he will not. He is so “ thundering ” provoking that we doubt very much whether old Job himself could put up with him more patiently than we have. He is a most extraordinary man. He does things that would have turned other men out of office ten limes over, but like the sacred monkeys of Benares he seems to be priveleged to play what pranks he pleases with impunity. He cannot, however, go on long with “ his hand against every man, and every man’s hand against him,” and if he only gets rope enough he will soon bang himsell.