CORRESPONDENCE.

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume XLII, 23 January 1907, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

A DISREGARDED WARNING. To the Kditor. Sir, -Before the septic tank contract was signed I wrote in your columns pointing out the mistake the City Council would make if accepted the single tender they had received, and impre.-sing on them the advisability of calling for fresh tenders. I pointed out in the plainest language that althongb the total amount of the tender was near the Engineer's estimate, yet in the schedule of prices attached to tender, by which extras are charged, the rates were exorbitantly h*gh. Ordinary cement work, for instance, which any contractor would be glad to do for any ratepayer at 303 per yard, was put at 60s in this schedule. The Council, however, chose to ignore the advice, and the result is now becoming apparent. Although, strictly speaking, the extras ! have not yet commenced, 5 et 3 piece of work outside the contract altogether has been given to the contractor at 'pchedule prices, and instead o£ costing the ratepayers £220, has cost £440. Why were tenders not called for this work if it was necessary ? I expect the genuine extras on this peptic tank contract will eventually run into^large figures ; but the first of the ratepayers' money thrown away through want of ordinary business caution on the part of the Councillors is i £-2-20. To put it in another way. The City Council have paid at- the rate of GOa per yard for a concrete wall, while any ratepayer, without asking prices, could have got a similar wall put up round hi? front garden at the rats of thirty shillings per yard. . I notice the Mayor writes a strong letter pointing out that this work was given lo the con^' tractor without tho Council's knowledge. If so, why does he not suspend tne official and put the is3ue betore the ratepayers '! lam. etc.. BUSINESS MAN. THE EXAMINATIONS AND NELSON COLLEGE. To the Editor. Sir, — It i 3 a significant fact tl.at neither Sandel nor Jennings, who are winners of University Junior Scholarships, received their ' " grounding " at Nelson College. It is equally significanttbat the name of no boy who bas received his entire education at Nelson College appears in the list of winners. It is contended that Ihe- weak spot of the College is its Lower School'; and this contention seems to be proved by the results of tlie examination in question. I am, etc., NELSONIAN. GAMBLING. To the Editor. Sir, — In your issue of January 15th you have an entirely false statement n reference to my remarks in the Ca:hedral on Sunday last. To me it is j passing strange that the editor of even i little country paper should allow juch a report to appear in print ! One laturally expects some approach to a j , *rue report of what one says, in the :olumns of a newspaper. But alas for me's expectatinos ! Kither your reporter was "a knave" or "a fool" if he .vas present at the Cathedral and heard ny remarks. For no honest man who desired to give the public a true rejort of the matter could have sent | /ou such an entirely erroneous report -f what I said, except he was somewhat j Jereft of his senses ! And I can scarcely I believe that the "Evening Mail" would' jmploy such a man as a reporter. Your ! report, followed up by your "leading 1 irticle," certainly leads one to suspect | -hat your reporter was not so simple as I otherwise was willing charitably to believe. At any rate, there seems • me- ! -nod in his madness" — for after giving m entirely false account of what oc- 1 purred, the Editor goes out of his way I m an editorial to pour out "the vials of ais wrath" upon me for not having' ,oined with the ministers of the denom- i inations in this mighty onslaught on the' gamber, Personally, I have no objection to follow the lead of my dissenting: brethren if it be a good lead,. While I ' lad rather that -c lead should' he ,'iven by my Bishop, I" certainly should .ot refuse to ,oin Vith "the brethren" n work for the social welfare of the people-especially as the Bishop was in mil sympathy with it. When therefore /our reporter says : "The Rev. JE Alanson announced that he had been' askj v P . reath °" the evils ° f gambling •nd had declined to do so," it stalls "hat is absolutely false. A^ain where /our report says that I said ""' knew md"a? 3 f oUt eW i S ° f the racecourse! nd therefore could not accede to the mmms had carefully thought out a course of r tO .. G od m aief e rji ffan^nnata^rftl the last moment heard, of the intendfh < & se V m< ?fIS on gambling I felt that as the subject of gamblin| was a great one,. and there were so mtnv dif church officers as $o whether I wai £ Cborha^tttl^d^efter^t sjft-°J ' do . so - l a^ ed ev^ °f Al Saints also, and he sajd "I am not doing so You hai better keep to your prepared subjects. " V And -J «*" so. uut before my sermon in tht> evening I rcf^d & the faVof he day being .appouited by some" of the ministers, but I was not going to P JTj UP m St Mcause of the WWW stated Moreover, I said I was not inclined on. so short a notice to preach on a suhject upon which there were so man y O p lnl t gambling betting and "gambling" in a dicfocus in a few words and enunciated it in a principle, and t found that to bet was to lay a wager, and to gamble was 1 ?^V? P°aKi # Bjn?e I recog! mty >hat the principle was the main [me, Wh'le I. .-was not inclined to condemn those who played whist for p^nny po.nts I personally had never in W \m P|ay?d for mousy, and while I had ,n my younger days i ritiaen my own horses in steeplechases, anf always been posseted of eo«d Worses, I never made a bet in my life. I said I might give a homily pn betting and gambling, but th & h ߧt (jug ! could givp you is myselt. Go and do thou likewise. Now, I have carefully rea(l H'P.homijiei). puhl|sh,Bd g),' greaf length in your issue" of January 15{,h, and I venture to believe my few words, spoken to a thoughtful and intelligent congregation,will do as much good as the more elaborate essays delivered by my Methodist and Baptist brethren, editor of' the "Eveuing "Mail • notwithstanding. And how; just a word re your editorial, gjncg-ypu Jjava wasted so much eloquence on a bogey I think the public wil! need «o fur^er werds from me tc show you up (n a ridiculous light; but with rsfaronco to my "unfinished education," I flatter myself, Mr Editor, that "I am not such a fool as I look" At any palp, jn my Jorge oxporience as a mjssipn pre.achp.r., amopg other special addresses to men I have had many gf tbSjfTSesfc- gatherings listen to me for 6 full T)our pji t!»e Bubject of bett ing and' gambling that have beer brought together at such a service in mo iy Pf th? t 0 WS9 of Australia, and you, Ms Editor, are the first man whr has been so good as to remind me of my need of a mpyp FPmplPte education in thjs n)attef. * Tfpvjrs., etc., EDWIN ALLANSON. Te Arowhenua, Wake Held, January 17, 1907. (The comments in the "Mail" wert written on the brief, but previously verified, import pf the sermon which appeared in the morning paper, and afterwards vgrlflad hy our own report cr r s inquiries among' responsible members of the congregation who were present al both services. Further reply to the correspondent' s_ letter is unnecessary, as the communication speaks for itself.— Ed. N.Ef.M.)