PORT CHALMERS TOWN COUNCIL

Evening Star, Volume VII, Issue 2027, 3 November 1869, Page 2

PORT CHALMERS TOWN COUNCIL

To the Editor of the Eveninq Star.

Sir — l have been waiting and waiting for some one better able than mj'self to reply to a letter in your paper of the 28th ult., signed l>y “ A Ratepayer,” relative to the doings of the Council here. Now I think, Mr Editor, before men take upon themselves the responsibility of questioning the acts of others placed in a public position by their own votes, they should at least make themselves acquainted with the matter they are writing on, and not rush into print and show to their fellow townsmen that they have been measuring the sense of the Council by a standard in their own possession. The facts of the case, as I understand them, are simply these Some time since before the “last Municipal year,” as “Ratepayer” states, a claim was made by Mr Millar, F.S. A., for an amount of nearly L3OO, due to him, as he stated, from the late Town Board ; and from enquiries made by tiie then Council, they were informed by members of tiro late Town Board that they did not th nk there was a single penny due to that gentleman. The claim was consequently repudiated, but some time during the last municipal year, an action was brought by Mr Millar’s trustees against the Corporation for a sura of about L3OO, I believe, for professional services rendered to the late Town Board, and, under the circumstances stated above, the then Council felt it their duty, as custodians of public money, to resist the claim, and not submit to what they considered an imposition. The result of the action fully proves that they were correct ; but with regard to the assertion of “A Ratepayer,” that the sum in dispute was simply L 35, or that any satisfactory arrangement could have been come to, I deny it. Then “ A Ratepayer ” goes on to state that “ Mr Mansfoid’s bill was L22S 17s Bd, and was reduced by the

taxing officer to LB3 13s 6d: thus we have to pay out of the rates the sum of LISB 8s 6d for the p’easure of going to law.” How he arrives at this amount I am really at a loss to discover.

Then “A Ratepayer” goes on to say—- “ Now, sir, is it safe to let these councillors borrow L 2.000, I ask ? and will they not squander it away ? Some restriction should be placed on them.” Can anything be more insulting to those who give their time and trouble to benefit their tellow-townsmeu? It is such men as “ A Ratepayer” who retard the progress of our little town. Had he taken the trouble to have attended the meetings, as I have done, he would have known that the object of borrowing the L 2,000 was a most praiseworthy one—viz., to open up streets in the town, and enable ratepayers to get to and build on their properties that are now lying idle, and which works are set out in the Public Works Committee’s Report, and adopted by the Council ; and, in coHftsion, I would simply ask “A ho does not think the present body of men as capable of being entrusted with the control and expenditure of a paltry L 2.000, as (ho late Town Board (men elected in the same way) were of some LB,OOO or 9,000 — the present men, as he is pleased to call them, being "business men”; and I am sure Councillor Miller ought to be much obliged to " A Ratepayer” for being singled out as " one of those obstinate, troublesome men, who will not see with other people’s eyes,” and finally rubbed down with "Ratepayer’s” opinion that he is entitled to the thanks of the ratepayers for the stand he took against the proposal of the Finance Committee—that stand being simply voting with four others for the taxation of the lawyer’s bill; and as to the item of L 8 6s 8d for preparing draft lease, wherein "A Ratepayer” states that you could buy one in any stationer’s shop for Is, I really think the assertion too ridiculous to reply to.—l am, &.c., Another Ratepayer, Port Chalmers, 3rd November, 1869.