CORRESPONDENCE.

Ohinemuri Gazette, Volume I, Issue 44, 15 October 1892, Page 10

CORRESPONDENCE.

[Our columns *re always open for correspondence, but we cannot under any consider* •fcion hold ourselves lisble or responsible lor what appears in them.]

TO THE EDITOR. Sib, —1 ahould like to ask who the Councillor was who opposed Reparation tooth and nail—who maintained that the administration of the' Thames County iv Qhiuemari was uuassailably virtuous Hud economical—that all the money was well ami truly expended, ttni that mutters could not possibly be better conducted while the CbairaMD Brodie uud Foreman Littlctjobn had charge tf;.flair* Now what does the Mine hmij say afoot Mr littlejohn wboui he stuck op for Mr in the old days, Why just the rery opposite of whftt He did in those time*. I hare beeu one of Cr Robson'a friend* in times gone by, believing all his statements in regard 10 his own virtue and motires, but either he is now playing a deepaod double game or eW » too foolish to aerit the snpport of the ratepayers. See, ton, how he conspires with a man r who, as Cr Nash truly said at the laai County meeting, cost this County £2000 besides getting nearly £200 a year for his own pocket out of public money in the first cbyp of this Council. I am puxe be » ashamed of his company, yet for some reason of his own be connteßAnces such men and their doings, 1 challenge Cr Robson to explain his action.—Yours, <fee, Ratcpatik.