CORRESPONDENCE.

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume VII, Issue 1026, 28 May 1880, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

» [Wodonot hold ourselves responsible for opinions expressed by correspondents.] [To the Editor of the Herald.] Sir, — I was surprised to read in your paper of the 20th, the account of MrA dair's resignation as Councillor of the Borough, and for the reason you give for taking such a step. Mr. Adair has erected a building of which all Gisborne may be proud to look on, and when we hear that the cellars had been flooded we were sorry to hear of the cause of flooding. But, Sir, that Mr. Adair should hold the Council responsible for the flooding of his cellar, and resign in consequence, is very strange. The Council were not to blame because the pipes were much too small to do the work required of them. But to proceed : Mr. Adair, finding it would require a much larger drain than the one in use, orders the work to be gone on with, and the workmen commenced to sink down to the pipes. All this took place early in the day, after the road- way was broken up, and a hole dug some 20 feet long by 8 feet wide to the level of the pipes. The Borough Engineer, passing down Lowe-street, found the men at work, and enquired of them the reason for digging up the roadway without first letting him know, in order that usual leave for such a work should be given to Mr. Adair or the contractor for the work. After three o'clock in the afternoon, the contractor sent a note to the Engineer, requesting permission to erect a hoarding in Lowe-street. The Engineer took the note to Mr. Townley, and requested him to sign, as Chairman of the last Council meeting, in the abaence of the Mayor ; and as Chairman of the last meeting of the Council, Mr. Townley signed the permission to erect the hoarding, but to open the roadway no permission was signed by Mr. Townley. A short time after, Mr. Townley called at the Town Clerk's office ; when the Engineer explained that the roadway was broken up before Mr. Adair saw the Engineer, or enquired of anyone for permission to do the work. The Engineer explained that the work had been commenced, and would be carried on whether permission was given or not. Mr. Townley then said that being the case, the best thing ho could do would be to cut off the name, and leave the matter for the Mayor to sign, who would return in the morning — not as stated in yourj,report, in a day or two. And now, Sir, if there was no wrong done, no law broken, why send to Mr. Townley for permission % Why did not Mr. Adair give the permission required ? And again ;'• if neither Townley nor Adair could sign the permission, how does the signing the permission by Mr. Townley condone the breach of the Bye-law when you Qontencl that Mr. Townley had no greater powers than other Councillors. It was to remove the red-tapeism you complain of that Mr. Townley signed the permission. Your sub-leader in last night's paper is even worse than than the first report, as I stated, to start with. If Mr. Adair resigned because the cellar was flooded, the Council were not to blame. But if the r Council make Bye-laws, and allow their laws to beset at nought by any one, then have the CounoiUors wasted the rates in framing laws which would have been better never made. It would have been very simple, and would not have taken many minutes to have sent for the Borough Engineer to have made the request to him before thework'was done on the roadway ; this would have been given. You, Mr.|Editor, would have been saved all this, trouble, the Bye-law would not have been broken, the Borough would have had the valuable services of Mr. Adair at the Council Board, and I Sir, should have been saved the trouble of writing this letter. ■£-! am &c, J, TOWKUSY. [Mr. Townley is disingenuous. Mr. Adair did not resign because his cellars became flooded ; but because having done that which was a sheer necessity, the Council proceed to prosecute him. Mr. Townley says if permission was asked it would have been given. Then why all this pother? Why not under the, circumstances have considered that permission had been $voni> And why should the Council employ'a lawyer to prosecute ? The Town GJerk has in numerous cases of breaches o£<the Byeilaws,' appeared to represent the Council. How is it he has not been instructed to do the same in this instance as ha has done before' \^hy put the ratepayers to unnecessary expense ? Will Mr. Townley be candid, and admit that personal feeling has been imported into this matter. — Ed].