CORRESPONDENCE.

Waikato Times, Volume XV, Issue 1272, 24 August 1880, Page 3

CORRESPONDENCE.

[Our correspondence columns arc impartially open to all, but we do not in any way identify ourselves with opinions expressed therein.]

TO THE EDITOR. Bib, — In your report of the meeting of ratepayers, held at Ngaruawahia on 1 4th August, Mr Day is stated to have explained that Mr Byron, had attempted to " coerce" (at other times he called it " intimidate") the late Board by sending ' ' a lawyer's letter to the effect that they would he interfering with ve,>ted rights by going on with the road." We now send you a copy of -the letter referred to:—

"Auckland, 2Gfch May, 18S0. " To the Newcastle District Road Board. "Gentlemen, — "We are instructed by Messrs Barton, C-irpe- ter and Byron, and Morrison, landowners in your district, to protest again&t what they con sider t© be the misapplication of the Government grant in aid of your district. They maintain, and we agree, that the object of such grant was for the improvement of the main road, and that such road has been clearly indicated by the application by your Board of moneys previously given with the same object, and by dealing with it as the main-road you have made it so. Mr Barton" one of our dent*, sold to your Board, at . low price, certain lano, on the express u lerstanding, not only that such land "*s to be used for the purposes of tt mainroad, but thct the main-road hould continue aa at present settle - but your Board now, in the propose expenditure of the grant, practically deal with another road running parallel with the main road so indicated and agreed upon, which other road, for the purposes of the grant, you must also designate as the j I main-road. We submit that such defiuition is contradictory and inapplicable— | inconsistent with your previous conduct — with Mr Barton's distinct understanding, and with the letter and spirit of the grant. We trust, therefore, that you will reconsider your intention and apply the money to the improvement of the proper main-road, or, at any rate, that you will not proceed with any other application of it until we or yourselves have represented the matter in question to the proper officer of the Government, and he naff determined whether such an application would not, in fact, amount to an unauthorised and improper expenditure of public moneys. For the present we say nothing of our olient's vested interests which your intended operations are calculated to injure, but we do not waive any damages to which they may ultimately be found to be entitled. " If you decline to comply with our request we are instructed to inform you that we shall be compelled to take such legal proceedings by mandamus action for damages or otherwise, as we may consider 'advisable. — We are, gentlemen, yours truly, " (Signed), Jackson and Russell." On comparing this letter with Mr Day's utterances you and the ratepayers will be able to form your own opinions of the veracity and straightforwardness that gentlemen is so fond of boasting about. — We are, &c, Carpenter and Byron, 0. J. W.Babton, Kenneth Morrison.

TO THE EDITOR. Sib,— lt would appear from your report of the meeting of ratepayers, held ati

Ngaruawahia, last Saturday, that the object was not so much to elicit an opinion on the Newcastle District Board as to vilify and slander Mr Byron, and to distort facts in order to support a weak and tottering oause. Mr Day's statement that Mr Byron tried to ooerce the Board by means of a lawyer's letter is utterly at variance with the facts of the case. While wishing to make every allowance for Mr Day's igoorance in a matter of fact of which he, as a member of the late Board, ought to be thoroughly conversant, I oannot help thinking that on this occasion he purposely misled the meeting from motives of peraonal spite to Mr ! Byron. Had Mr Day been actuated by other motives than this he would have told the meeting the truth in regard to this letter and the oause whioh led to it. On it becoming known that the Board were going to abandon Bonfrey's road, or as Mr Day would Bay, "spend no more money on it," a deputation of ratepayers, consisting of Messrs Carpenter, Byron, Morrison, Wilson, and myself, waited on the Board and protested against this action, and applied to have the road completed. They were told that their application should have the careful consideration of the ! Board, who would advise them of its decision. Despite this promise, with which the deputation were satisfied, the Board never had the comnfon courtesy to answer their application, preferring rather to go on with the other road in the meantime. Afterwards when I, as one of the deputation, expostulated, Mr Day said that had not Mr Byron attended and • spoken — or, as he chose to say, dictated — to the Board, he might have felt disposed to listen to the other members of tLe deputation. Hence the la\v3 r er's letter, which does not seek to coerce the Board in the least, and the only mention it makes of "vested interests" is in these terms: — " For the present we make no mention of our clients' vested interests." In regard to the lust resolution, it is from beginning to end a wilful perversion of the truth. So far from Mr Byron inciting the ratepayers to a breach of the peace, he did all in his power to prevent what might have been a very seriou3 row. The facts of the case are briefly these : — The annual meeting being over, I, as Secretary to the Board, had put the books into a kit and was walking up the room, when Mr Day, assisted by Messrs Dawson and Johns, came behind me and tried to snatch them out of my hand. I resisted, trying to keep possession of them. Mr Johns, seeing both my hands engaged, thought it a good opportunity to hit me. I then hit him and any others who kept annoying me. Mr Byron, seeing Mr Corboy anxious to assist his friends in their laudable exertions, tried to prevent him, possibly in the interests of fair play, thinking three to one were odds enough. At all events, Mr Corboy justified Mr Byron's action by joining in the fray and freezing on to the bone of contention, viz., the books, having first disposed of Mr Byron, whose first action when at liberty was to call the constable, to whose custody I gave up the books, no one else having any authority over them, in the absence of a demand made under the 35 th clause of the Highways Act. To say that Mr Byron incited the row is only true inasmuch as he, in common with others, bad opposed Messrs Day and Co. at the meeting, sufficient cause apparently for a breach of the peace, in Mr Day's estimation. — I am, etc., C. J. W. Baeton.