'I WON'T WITHDRAW!’

Gisborne Times, Volume LXIX, Issue 10855, 26 March 1929, Page 3

'I WON'T WITHDRAW!’

LIVELY HARBOR BOARD MEETING./

MR'•WADE CAUSES A SCENE

Wild accusations’' in connection with a report by an executive officer made yesterday by Mr A. Wade, a member ot the Harbor Board, culminating m the chairman (Mr W. G. Sherratt) threatening to apply tlie closure to the meeting because the member would not withdraw what was held to be offensive comment, provided an interesting diversion in the proceedings. The storm broke when the engineer presented a report on the condition of an employee who had been made a compassionate allowance of 25s weekly on account of injuries he had received following a fall from his motor cycle whilst riding to work. It was shown that the young man would bo in hospital for some tune yet “Why did the engineer not tell the hoard that the injuries were due to an accident with Ids motor cycle?” demanded Mr Made.

The Engineer: ‘‘l did” “I'ou didn’t,” retorted Mr Wade, “it seems to me that you show favors to some employees.”

“Voir must withdraw that statement?” the chairman cut in pointed-

“I won't withdraw it,” said Mr tVado, determinedly. ‘’Please sit down” ordered the chairman.

“I won’t sit down”, Mr Wade retorted with heat. “You’ll have to withdraw it or I’ll adjourn the meeting,” returned the chairman, warmly. “Well, 1 adjourn the meeting,” challenged Mr Wade. “I’ve a right to speak and I’m going to. The engineer’s duty was to report that the accident occurred with a motorcycle. The members of the Board did not know that the injured man was riding a motor-cycle at the time and that the mishap occurred on the Win. Pet tie bridge. A friend of the victim had given me' the information and 1 have a jierfeet right to ask a. question.” “There is a proper way in which to ask a question.” retorted the chairman. "You have a very aggressive manner of doing so.” “There is only one way to ask a question,” heatedly retorted Mr Wacle.

Mr C. H. Williams flatly contradicted 31 r Wade’s assertions, stating that he had a distinct recollection of the engineer informing the board that the young man had' been injured whilst" motor-cycling to work. It had been made clear that the victim had no legal claim on the board for compensation, but, in view of the circumstances, it had been decided to make a compassionate allowance. He appealed to members to confirm the truth or otherwise of his opinion, and there was a general chorus of endorsement.

Mr Wade: “1 don’t remember a motor-cycle being mentioned in connection with the accident.” “Will Mr Wade withdraw his .statement now?” challenged Mr Williams.

“I won’t withdraw it for you or anyone else,” retorted Mr Wade hotly. Continuing, lie reiterated his allegation that tlie board had never been informed that the victim was riding a motor-cycle when he met with the mishap, and alleged that the accident was probably due to the fast riding.

Mr T. Quirk endorsed the statement concerning the position puf by Mr C. H. Williams, adding that lie feared that Mr Wade had either been absent or had forgotten about the engineer’s statement. Mr Wade: “I was here. I haven’t forgotten. Did the engineer tell the board that the' man was riding a motor cycle?”

Mr Quirk: “I. wouldn’t be sure now whether it was a motor cycle or a cycle. Anyway it was reported that he was riding to work.” Mr C. G. Holdsworth said that it seemed as though it was Mr Wade’s word against the rest of the board. Members had had enough of the bu-siness,-as Mr Wade seemed to be intent on defying authority. He thought tlie chairman should take disciplinary action. This advice was not adopted by the chairman, who proposed that the compassionate allowance should he continued for a further two months. The motion was carried unanimously. Mr Wade declared lie was not opposed to the allowance, but he still wanted to know why the engineer had not reported that a motor cycle' was involved in the mishap. The board passed to the next business.