THE BOROUGH COUNCIL AND THE ENGINEER.

Patea Mail, Volume IX, Issue 1056, 6 July 1883, Page 2

THE BOROUGH COUNCIL AND THE ENGINEER.

Since last ordinary meeting of the. Borough Council the result of Cr Aitchison’s motion with reference to the Engineer’s dismissal of which he then gave notice, has been awaited with considerable interest. In moving “That the Engineer be notified that after three months from date his services would not be required ” Cr Aitchison said : lam very sorry the Engineer is not present. As he is not I will not detain the Council with many remarks. Most Councillors are fully aware of the circumstances surrounding the question. The total cost in connection with the .Engineer’s department is too much and the time seems to have arrived when- we can do without a per--mauent Engineer altogether. I may state that this is not a personal question at all. Had the "Engineer been here;l ; would have gone into; .the question in detail. Cr Paul seconded the resolution. The’ Mayor here read two letters from the Engineer one of which accused himself arid Cr Aitchison of unfairness. (As we do not publish the letters we cannot therefore give the discussion—not very complimentary to the Engineer from some of the Councillors—, which ensued on them, but, it was; ultimately decided to refer one of theur (back to the writer.) Or MeCarthy, moved, as an amehdment to the resolution, “ That the. Engineer get 3 months salary in lieu Of notice.” He thought that if the Engi-; neer were kept on for the three months his money .would be exhausted and he might be some time finding employment.; Or Williams thought, the Engineer had as much opportunity of looking out for employment,when in work as out of it.„ ( ■ : ' Cr Adams looked at the 1 matter-in' this light: If the Engineer were the best that -ever lived ho .did hot think they could keep! him oh any longer now than three months. He did not think Cr Aitchison was dismissing- the , Engineer through misconduct, but" because the Borough-could not keep him any longer; i ■ - I ' l • . • '* 1

The Mayor would support the original resolution. He did not think the Council were justified ini giving three months’ salary in lion of notice. There .were several works in- connection with the Engineer uncompleted. Cr Aitchispn: I think the amendment: bears far more heavily on the Engineer than the resolution. No doubt Cr McCarthy is trying to do - the Engineer a good turn but I think it would be a most damaging thing. It would indicate we were disgusted with the Engineer to pay him three months salary and tell him to clear out like that. The amendment was lost, and the motion on being put to the meeting was carried.