THE COLONIST AND THE BOARD OF WORKS.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume II, Issue 180, 3 August 1867, Page 2

THE COLONIST AND THE BOARD OF WORKS.

To the Ed-Tok op the Nelson Evening Mail. Sir —The bilious effusion of your contemporary, the Colonist, on Tuesday last, in its terrific onslaught upon the Board of Works, afforded me no small amusement, emanating, as it did, from the self-dubbed guardian of the public rights, who nevertheless takes very good care that the ratepayers of the city of Nelson shall know as little as possible, as far as the columns of the Colonist are concerned, of the " ways and doings'* of the Board. Indeed, but for the faithful record of the fortnight meetings of the Board which appears in the Evening Mail, the public might rest in total ignorance of the proceedings of that august and much calumniated body. Why the Colonist should travel out of its way to throw dirt at a body of men who have been doing their utmost to serve the public interests at the expense of very much of their time (which in this instance at least certainly means money) I am quite at a loss to understand. The Colonist says that "while we are bound to acknowledge that in many parts of the town excellent roads and streets have been formed, and much good done within the past two years, the Board has formed expensive streets in some p. rts of the town where there is scarcely a house in the whole length, while other and important and much frequented thoroughfares have been wholly neglected for years." Now, sir, I would ask you, as an impartial judge, to point out where in the city of Nelson there is an " important and much frequented thoroughfare" that has been "wholly neglected for years." The recklessness of this assertion is something incredible, were the readers of the Colonist not pretty well habituated to such unscrupulous statements. "An important thoroughfare neglected for years!" Why the man must be daft to write such nonsense. Why, sir, I who live in a comparatively unfrequented part of the city have frequently remarked to others who are similarly situated as to locality, that nearly all the rates have been expended on the central parts of the city. Surely the Board are to be commended for spending some part of the rates in trying every year to improve the more unfrequented streets. Again the all-accomplished Colonist, in no wise dubious of its power to deal with any difficulty, however wiser and abler heads may shrink from such responsiblities, constitutes itself the legal adviser of the Board, in reference to the Dun Mountain Railway, and in so doing only gives auother proof of its pretentious ignorance of matters of which a public journal should certainly be cognisant; for the Board has no control or power whatever over the line, unless it can prove that a positive injury has been inflicted upon the roadway by the rail. I had the curiosity, after reading that precious bit of editorial bombast which suggests that the Board should see to the performance of their contract by the Company, to take a look at the Dun Mountain Railway Bill, and, would you believe it ? I found that the Company is empowered, if they choose, to run a double line through our streets ? And now I would ask what in the name of common-sense and fact does he meau by suggesting that the Board of Works should "make the most thorough and repeated examinations into all its matters of finance," etc., "burking of most important and instructive auditors' reports ?" If J mistake not, some twelvemonths ago, the public were informed, through the medium of the Evening Mail, of the proceedings which took place at the Board, when the balance-sheet was published in its columns. Neither the Examiner, however, nor the Colonist thought proper to gratify their readers by publishing the report as news of the day, unless it was paid for as an advertisement. Judging from what I knovr of the Secretary, Mr Younger,. and hia willingness to afford information upon all matters connected with the Board, I feel confident that the Colonist, had it really heen so anxious for the interests of the

public, would have found ho difficulty in obtaining all necessary information on these subjects. Is it not strange, too, that with this anxiety for the public good, it did not publish, the report in its columns ? By the way, I have been reminded that the present editor of the Colonist was for one year an auditor of the Board. He evidently did not investigate the accounts of the Board very minutely, for it afterwards turned out that there was a deficiency. How does he account for this fact, I wonder ? The board is open to the reporters of the local newspapers, and has been so for several years, and therefore it is simply absurd to assert that any of its proceedings have been •' burked." If they have, it is plain the Colonist had not done its duty to the public. I only hope the present Board will spend the money placed in its hands as judiciously and to as much purpose as its predecessor, and I, as a large ratepayer, shall be very well satisfied, in spite of the malicious and unfounded insinuations of the Colonist. Yours, &c, A Ratepayer. August Ist, 1867.