THE ANNUAL MEETING OF NEWCASTLE RATEPAYERS.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 3092, 10 May 1892, Page 2

THE ANNUAL MEETING OF NEWCASTLE RATEPAYERS.

♦ THE 11EPORT UNADULTERATED. TO THE EDITOR. Sir,— As The Waikato lijies only comes by mail twice a week to Whatawhata (Tuesdays and Saturdays), those who wished to see Thursday's paper (which might be supposed to contain a full and lengchy report of what took place at the annual inoeting), hart no opportunity of seeing the report before Saturday : otherwise, I should havo protested earlier against tlie mass of inaccuracies and suppression of interesting facts which should be reported for the information of the ratepayers of this road district. I was at the annual meeting, and heard and saw what was said and done there from start to

finish. I will, therefore, mention a few nf the misrepresentations, and ask you, Mr Editor, to kindly publish thpm in the interest of fair phy to all, and justice to the ratepayers. Ist. Your reporter says : " Mr Corboy quoted at length from various Acts to show what was required to constitute a, legal nomination, but gave no information as to the particular informality in the late cases.' . Now, what are the true, ficts in regard to the above statement? It is this : That while discussing and considering the clauses read bearing on the nomination, the following extraordinary facts were elicited on the admission of Messrs Shepherd and Dawson :—That the latter gentleman had nominated a person whose name was never on the rate roll for the district, nor on the valuation roll; that this person never made an application, or any person on his behalf, to put his name on the valuation roll; aud, lastly, that he never had paid any rates at the time of his nomination: and worse still, that Mr Dawson, who was one of the nominators, was at that time on the defaulters' list, Would any other two men outside a lunatic asylum nominate a person under the above circumstances. It appears Mr Dawson has already profitted by the information given as he has now made out a correct nomination paper after practising for about four years on informal ones. How the Returning Officer is slandered for not allowing persons nominated as above to get on the Board. If a person gets on a Board otherwise than is provided by law, it must be in a fraudulent manner aud the question may be asked does he tlmn occupy his seat on the Board as a fraud. When a Returning Officer prevents this, he desires the thanks of the ratepayer*. 2nd. Mr Fawkes' question is misquoted as well as the chairman's reply. What the chairman said in reply was this: " I cannot say of my own knowledge whether the rumour is true or false. I have heard a somewhat similar rumour but did not give it further attention. If there is any truth in the rumonrand the person who asked the question be a close observer perhaps he might have seen some indication of the object of his inquiry at the meeting. At this stage some person sang ont "Shepherd " who, without replying lowered his head with an unpleasant smile on his face. 3rd. The vote of thanks given to the outgoing and incoming Board your reporter has divided in two, he then has mutilated the first part and surpres«ed the second part altogether and made no mention of the discussion that called for the resolution. It was this, Mr Dawaon said that the members of the Board were a clique and that the returning officer was kept in his position to cloake that clique. This charge was hotly resented by ratepayers present as unwarrantable. The chairman called on Mr Dawson to withdraw the offensive and untruthful charge or he would test the feeling of the meeting and see if any person endorsed his views, Mr Dawson having declined to withdraw, the following resolution duly proposed and seconded was put to the meeting and carried without a dissenting voice, viz. : " That this annual meeting assembled hero to-day desires to accord a cordial vote of thanks to the outgoing Board for the efficient and satisfactory way the business of the district under their control has been managed for sever.il yeaw past, and at the sani6 time to express our entire confidence in the uersonel of the new Board." Your readers will see how your reporter mutilated th« above resolution, he saw that it was a forcible rebuke to the writer of the untruthful statements under the heading "Whatawhata " in your issue of the 2Sth April, on Road Board affairs. I will not trouble you further Mr Editor cu this subject for the present as it is already rather long, but will allow your readers to judge from what has bcun said.—l am, One Who Was at the Mketing. May nth, 1892.