A REFUTATION.

Waimate Daily Advertiser, Volume III, Issue 97, 17 January 1901, Page 3

A REFUTATION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib, —Will yon please grant me •space to refute Councillor Coltman’s •statements when addressing the ratepayers after the last election, f'-rri-■cillor Coltman charges mo with iaisehood and misrepresentation in referring to the Council’s unanimous action in approaching and arranging with Mr Baxter to act as borough engineer. Tho following extracts from the Council’s Minute Book will clearly show tho true position. At the Council meeting, held September 23, 1900, when all tho councillors were present excepting Councillor Sinclair, a motion was moved by Councillor 0 Connor, and seconded by Councillor Jones, and carried unanimously: “ Tiiat his “Worshipthe Mayor inte view Mr Bax- “ ter and ascertain on what terms he •“ woo'd be willing to und ".'take the “ Council's engineering work for urn

“year.” Tho Mayor interviewed Mr Baxter during the course of the mouth, a ul at the next meeting of Council, on October 22, Mr Baxter’s terms were laid on tho table. A draft agreement was drawn up and submitted to meeting, hold on November 26, for the Council’s approval, when Councillor Coltman objected to the appointment of Mr Baxter on the ground that no advertisement had been inserted in the newspapers calling for applicatians for the position, and he quoted Section 43, No. 1 bje-law, in support of his objection. Surely the unanimous action of die nine councillors at the Septumb w •meeting in asking the Mayor to interview Mr Baxter, must clearly and unmistakeably indicate a strong desire to retain Mr Baxter’s services, and give him an opportunity to tender them through what was really only a modified arrangement with the Council. No mention was made at the September meeting to call for applications for tho position, but at the November meeting Councillor Coltman fired wrh a desire to show his suddenly acquired knowledge of the byelaws, and the enforcing of them, actually stultified his action at the September meeting by objecting to the appointment. Now this was done after Mr Baxter’s terms were known to •the Council, so assuredly an act of injustice was perpetrated on that gentleman. What was Cr. Coltman’s object in refusing to appoint Mr Baxter after supporting a motion ordering the .Mayor to interview him and get terms '?

Was <'ouncillor Coleman awakened to die fact that, it is highly requisite for the council to carry oat its by-laws; or was it simply a piece of objectionable obstruction, which has resulted most unfairly to an old servant. Kate -■v.-ors will now see who is guilty of

■ .tng misrepresentation. Councillor CoUruan, in denying that be had anything to do with the approaching of Mr Baxter and obtaining terms from him, or myself, in stating that he and his supporters war© party to it. Here is other instance of Councillor Colt-

,n's neglect to enforce the by laws

to the meeting hold on December 21, 1819, at which Councillors Coltman, Junes, Inkster and Mann were present: “Considerable discussion ensued upon the cleaning of the closets it) Victoria Park, and it was proposed by Councillor Collett and seconded by Councillor Mann, ‘ that the council appoint T. McConnell to look after Victoria Park to keep the urinals an-! closets clean and to see that no aatnago was done to the trees and fences, at a salary of Bs per week.’” Why did Councillor Coltman forget the existence of the by-law in this case and not call for applications for the position. How well Councillor Coltman has kept his promises given in the following minutes of the council. On December 21, 1893, Councillor Coltman “ con- “ gralukvtod Dr Barclay on taking his “ seat as Mayor, saying that councillors would assist in every' possible way to “ carry out the work of the council.” But this he completely eclipsed by a speech he made on December 20, 1899, wherein he “ congratulated Dr Barclay on bis re-election, and felt sure that he would fill the office in the ensuing year as he had done in the’past. Differences of opinion were almost sure to arise on certain questions, but no such differences which might arise at the council table should he remembered outside.” Councillor Coltman not only took his differences outside the council, but himself along with them. His irritating and offensive remarks towards me, for instance, may only be checked by the enforcement of certain other by-laws which are set in operation in a different quarter. Now, if a majority of the ratepayers have decided that the Mayor was wrong in proceeding without delay to make the the Building By-law operative, it is imperative for the re • elected five to proceed on legal grounds and prove the Mayor wrong, in the Supreme Court. Can any intelligent person assert thjit -a simple majority vote is proof of the right or wrong action of a public man in carrying out duties laid down by Act of Parliament. If this

right is denied our public men : e a j hearing in the Supreme Court! m ! settling disputes only by a mnj-jnty j vote, then in my humble opinion wo j may as well do away with our Mu ii- j cipal Corporation Act altogether and j make each municipality a law unto itself, when backed by a fluctuating majority vote.—l am, etc., J. B. Milsou, TO THE EDITOR. ! Sir, —Soma time ago the Ar: r - : were burnt out and lost their valuable | set of instruments, whoa tho Waim.-ue ' Band kindly lent them theirs mud i they were able to secure anoi-h n‘ k a. i from bead quarters. Tiia army were j very grateful to tho band for ’ !»-.•! r i kindness, and in return they kindly i assisted the Waimato Brass Ba id to j play the Mounted Bill ;s to eh irch on 1 Sunday, oth inst. In this cold, cru-l j world, such little acts of kindness i deserve vecordi g, and I am sure tk- • Waimam Brass Band appreciate t i ;j i help, and I think the public -1n,,: ; know that tho Army Imv-j ar, -e, .gotten that <.>•'•; goo 1 turn d---v • a iotber. — 1 re:, ac., j Hkup One Another. Bovs. ! ! ; ■ ; ; , : ! .