A REFUTATION.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXV, Issue 2870, 4 December 1890, Page 2

A REFUTATION.

TO THE EDITOR. Silt,— In your report of the proceedings of tho Hamilton Borough Council on Saturday, the iilJth inst, appears a paragraph in which it states that a demand was made by Mr \V r . M. Hay on n}y behalf fop the sum of yl Is, buing the auioyut dijo (o ipe for wages, and that considerable diucussiuii cqsijed ovor the demand, as I refused to work tho four days that I claimed for, and further it appears that at one time the discussion assumed such a serious aspect that the Mayor moved the suspension of the standing orders in order to afford an opportunity to the to discuss tlio matter fully. Ihe latter portion of thp paragraph shows that Or. Jones ended the niattej' by saying that the demand wasasipajl ope, that I had been a good servanL to the Council, for thirteen years, and that | had lost an pye ii) the service, and conpluded by min ing that | be paid the amount claimed, which wac aecoiicjed by (jr. Tjppen and parried. All this formula over a nipi) of t>i Is plaji|]ed by a retiring old servantafter thirteen years faithful service, and that servant retiring at liis own request will seem peculiar to the people of Hamilton who have known mo whilst in the employ of the Council. The real facts of tho case are these: After tendering my resignation, on account of lil'.'lwaltli, which thp !-;0ili;pil accepted, they requested me to remain on diiLy for a woek in order to enable my successor to become acquainted with tho naturo of his duties, to [joint out to him all the culverts and bridges, and to hand over all the tools and material belonging to the borough. I did all this, and on no occasion did 1 refuse to perform any work, nor did any one request ine to perforin any. I therefore deny most aiiipiiiftioall/ tho fals.s and inaljcjous '_t.at.e_ment of the member who ailegttd that J. refused duty, and I now challenge him to furnish proof. That member's name, I hear, is Cr. Bell. The report does not say it was he, nor any other member, but I have reason to believe it was he. Prior to Cr. Bell's recent olection f spoko rather freely and opetilj r , commenting on his incapacity r.s councillor, and, 1 presume, hp thouglif, he had a right to retaliate. .V wilful jalsphijii'd"by itf) pfasi'ly. of family, and a councillor; mado in pouncil assembled, to say tho least of it, sounds rather ridiculou.:. The claim Mas a just oue, and I have since been paid, aud t can assure you, Mr lCditor, that had I made a note of tliu ovei-tiiuo that I have worked for tlio borough uiy claim would have been a large one, for who is there in Hamilton that has not soon mo going along tlio streets o;i we,s storir.y uiglits in the middle of yiijtbfi \vitij aii(} lake, j-o seo that the jti'tiocj vers fecKjej}' pujyej-ts washed away.—-Youra truly W. Peacock. Hamilton, -nd December, 1.590.