THAMES V. OHINEMURI.

Thames Star, Volume XV, Issue 4977, 22 December 1884, Page 1

THAMES V. OHINEMURI.

(To the Editor of the Evening Stab.) Sib, —In your issue of the 15th insl., you honor us with a leading article, for which, with the advice contained therein, accept thanks. Bui allow me, most sapient scribe, to put you straight in some of your ideas ? You say, "We wish to sever our connection with the local body to which we belong." Belong is the word, for we are not looked upon as part of the County. We "belong" to it to be fleeced of our revenue by a concrete ring, withoat having a say in the matter. You say, " We fail (o see where or how any benefits can be derived by them if their prayer was granted." You are not expected to see. Why, the shadow of Brodie's corpus, in the shape of withdrawal of advertisements, would make most men of your stamp blind. Don't open your eyes—it won't pay. You say, " We are anxious to plunge into expenditure necessary to carry on the departmental work." JN"ow, what we want to do is to " plunge " out of expense, which we would be doing by getting rid of the Thames County Council. You say, "At present the expense of its government is mutually divided between the other portions of the County." That in part I deny, and to show you why I do so, I will relate how the oracle is worked. There was £1600 to be spent on a track at Harangabake. We have an Engineer at £300 a year, commission, and travelling expenses ; a foreman at £200 and travelling expenses; but these gentlemen not beiDg apparently willing to lay off the track two more Engineers at 12s 6d per diem each were employed. The following is a true copy :—" Pay-sheet £arangahake Eoad, July, 1884: W. Eowe, 9 days at | 7s. £3 3s; H. Jones, 13 days at 7s, £4 I 11s; W. Martin, 5 days at 7s, £115s; H. Wilkinson. 25 days at Ba, £10 18s; total, £19 175." Now, sir, we find this Mr Wilkinson (whoever he may be, no person here having any knowledge of him, and the men with whom he is supposed to be employed know nothing of him, and in the face of four " Engineers " being employed on *his "job," he cannot possibly be one of that fraternity 1; is also on the March pay-sheet for £8 Bs, and on the May pay-sheet for £10 15s, which with the July sheet of £10 8s makes the very nice sum of £29 12s. The pay sheets quoted I have seen, and therefore vouch for; but there are other sheets I did not see, and on which the same thing may have been worked. Please remark that this man's screw comes to more than one half of the total amount of the sheet for that month. Another reason why separation is of vital importance to every resident in Ohinemuri is—a member of the late Council received £10 19s travelling expenses, the whole of which is put down against the Ohinemuri Eiding of which he was not the member. And this is one of the reasons why the " precious" Separation Committee get their backs up. I can, and will, in some future issue, give some other transactions a showing up ; but as you say Separation has died a natural (P) death, I will reserve them to put life into it, if it should be required. But from present appearances, Separation (notwithstanding your assurance to the contrary) never looked healthier. Now Mr Editor, before you tender advice, see that you are in a position to give it, and get acquainted with the •• ills we have to bear " before you suggest a remedy. Hoping the above remarks will have the effect of enabling you to see things as they are, and not as your patrons would like them to be, is the wish of—Yours truly, T. E. Shaw. [Having a desire to give every latitude to the disappointed separationists, we publish the foregoing letter ; and considering its source it is more than likely that a perusal of it will cause no surprise. The insinuations in it will, of course, betaken for what they are worth when the signature is arrived at. Certain words of an abusive nature have been eliminated from the above effusion.—Ed. Stab ]