WORKING MEN'S CLUB AND MR W. W. COLLINS.

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9605, 21 December 1896, Page 3

WORKING MEN'S CLUB AND MR W. W. COLLINS.

*0 THK EDITOR OF THK PRESS. Sir,—The letter from Mr G. H. Rodmell which you publish in your Saturday's issue is so manifestly incorrect in many of its particulars that I trust you will find space in your columns for this reply. In the first place, it was Mr Rodmell's own ignorance as to the forms of procedure in conducting a business meeting that prevented his amendment being taken, he wishing to move an amendment to an amendment before the resolution had been discussed orthe first amendment submitted to the meeting. In his letter Mi , Rodmell states that the business was commenced by a member moving that a sum of £10 l>e given to the fund being raised as a testimonial to Mr Collins. I, Sir, was the mover of that resolution, and must flatly contradict Mr Rodmell by stating that the business did not commence in the way he has stated. It was commenced by the Chairman reading a suggestion from the Committee of the Club to the effect that a sum of not less than £5 5s be voted by the members towards this testimonial, and it was after this had been read that I proposed the sum should be £10. Mr Rodmell then proceeds to state that only about a dozen members were in favour of anything being given. This is again incorrect, as the numbers who voted in favour of £10 being given were twenty-two, as against twenty-six in favour of £5 Ss. Mr Rodmell then accuses the Chairman of putting the amendment to my resolution wrongfully, the amendment being for £5 5s to be given instead of £10. But here Mr Rodmell has again permitted his bias to blind him, as the Chairman ,was perfectly right in the action he took. A division was called, and as some of the members appeared to be"doubtful as to which side to vote on, he, instead of calling out "for the amendment to the right, against it to the left," called out—" Those in favour of £5 5s to the right, against it to the left." the same thing, but stated more plainly. Then Mr Rodmell says that "the greater part of tho3e in favour of nothing being given voted for the £5 55." Why, sir, after Mr Rodmell's own attempt at confusing the meeting by moving an amendment to an amendment had been disposed of—and I, for one, did not even understand what he was desirous of doing, as he was so quickly ruled out of order—not another word was said in favour of nothing being given, so that unless Mr Rodmell had private information as to the feelings of some of those present, he had no opportunity whatever of discovering that anyone, besides himself, was in favour of giving a simple vote of thanks, and no more. Certainly there were twenty-six members who voted for the £5 ss, and twenty-two for £10, everyone in the hall, as far as I could see, voting one way or the other, so where " the large number of members " present who were in favour of nothing being given were to come from Ido not know. As the meeting continued for some little time after the amendment was carried, Mr Rodmell - had plenty of opportunity to have proposed his second amendment that nothing should be given had he so desired it, but the fact was that the meeting was so unanimously in favour of something being given that he must have seen he would only Be wasting time in proposing it. This was seen by the unanimity with which the meeting carried the second resolution that a circular letter be sent to all other Working Men's Club's in New Zealand informing them of what we were doing in regard to this testimonial, and suggesting a similar procedure from them. This was carried with only two dissentients in a meeting numbering forty-eight members, and was a substantial reply to Mr Rodmell's un-put amendment, that nothing should be given. There was no sharp practice as he has intimated, but simply a determination by the Chairman that everything should be done in order, and it perhaps sharpjy contrasted with Mr Rodmell's slovenly method of ignorantly trying to propose a second' amendment before the first had been dealt with. Apologising for the length of this letter. I enclose my card and remain, sir, yours, ■&c., Tbuth.