BOROUGH AFFAIRS.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume III, Issue 320, 16 October 1882, Page 2

BOROUGH AFFAIRS.

Td Hie Editor of the \Btar.

'Sir,~-I have watched with Bdmeihterbsfc .the correspondence which has lately appeared in your journal relative to 'borough affairs. In Met' evening's issue I find a letter from, a correspondent wJio writes under the nomrfi plume of " Bate* payer Clique," in reply, to. another signing himself "R. H, O." I think.it decidedly unfair that " R..S. 0." should be attacked by quotations which' 'endanaie'd from the pen of another correspdnde'nt, 1 namely, " Burgess." " Ratepayer Clique," in his i reply, quotes ,from ; f Burgeps'|"s lettetas though poor "R. H, o,"' was respap/ble ior the whole of the correspondence which appears in the Star. Now, to analyse the sense of "Ratepayer's" last effusion. ■Firstly, in his opinion"' R; H. OV'bas got •? trenching on the ibrain,") whatever that may mean* I. have it on good authority that no such disease is known to medical science, ' hefc'ce ' yoixr cprre&pindent's' diagndsis 'must be' iticorrect. Secondly, he informs » R. H. 0." " that Hawera is not the only - place where soft places in a road have had to be dug up and metal put in to make tile same solid. I ', I have heard the opinion freely ■ expressed 'by practical men that the gravel which had previously been laid afforded' aWpte foundation W the broken ! rneja) j withoutreßoVting tf) tb# extravagant expedient complained] of by " Burgepb." •'Ratepayer* then' says, "but Bhould it have been a mistake in this. -instance [Which "lie &6& not' deny] it has not cost jE2OOO for the voluminous and exhaustive 'public works' report 'by the 1 first 'public works committeei'*i"At;this stage of his letter your correspondent has evidently gqtja ftMJe jpnt ,o| his, depth, and ft is very .difficult to ascertain^wliat his intended "meaning is. ' 'Y'niust therefore await " Ratepayer*" . .elucidation. , before, at1 tempting to comment Upon this aUim/ably c'obstr'adMd sentenced' 'Of' cbnrse. taken ' in 'a'lUe'ral sense/ it mioans' that, on acctfpnt [ '6t l 'ihk action token 1 W'ihe'wefyfii committee in ; byeaT£irf^'up' jl P3HBc4s-street being A'/iHistakV the '4SM Wport of the

oi}gin»l(!pt»Mii(rßvWorkß,«ptmnitteß *ot pqst i-2000 to %tlj»>inrci!f*jract. Strange^ paradox; butJL <taih,6pp^vßa|tepayer)' jyiH.malce himself tflain)tapon this! point,' w lien I shall-- tiftVe"gr<Hifc pleasure in discussing the subject with him. Your correspondent, after a long train of abstruse and laborious thought, has arrived at the conclusion that in the iqterests pfj the burgesses of Hawera it is incumbent upon the Council io frame the first publio works report and hang it in the New Chamber. If this is the wish of ratepayers generally by all means let it be done ; but in fairness to the present committee, who I feel assured ar,e not desirous of hiding their light under a bushel, I think their report should also be framed, and so allow the public io see the contrast. Trusting that 1 next time " Ratepayer Clique "writes to the public Press he will make himself more intelligible,— l am, &c, • , . Citizen. October 14th, 1882.

t 1 ' $o the Editor of the Star. Sib,— -A misconception seems to be general amongst those engaged in the correspondence in the Star on " Borough affairs.",. With, your permission- I will endeavor to put them right. In my place in the council during last meeting' I expressed an opinion that the . council should not hastily take in hand new ■work's, as about £2000 of the loa,n had been appropriated (not spent), and as the half-yearly statement was then being prepared. l£ ia a matter for congratulati6n 'tliati the good sense of your correspondents has kept the discussion of 1 boroughi affairs' free from that personal invective which so often disfigures letters ,to the papers op. local matters. — I 'am, &c, W. Murray Thomson. Oct. 18, 1882.