THE STORMY BOROUGH

Southland Times, Issue 19277, 23 June 1924, Page 10

THE STORMY BOROUGH

To the Editor.

Sr, —Your correspondent “Unanimous” answers to my last letter is childish in the extreme. He avoids all the main points in my letter, and talks a lot of piffle, which, when summed up, leads to nowhere. He says I am biassed against the Mayor. I have given him sound reason why I am against the Mayor’s management of our Borough affairs. This, of course, is bias. He has failed to show anything in his favour. “Unanimous’s” prattle about future ratepayers. and possible mayors is in keeping with the rest of his argument. He avoids the main point, that is, that electors have more say as to how my money is to be spent than I have; for that is what it amounts to. To mention one case in point I know of: A family, with five votes, two of them the parents (ratepayers) voted one way, the other three voted McChesney because, as they said, “He is a nice man and put our name on the roll.” It is these who ate not ratepayers that our present Mayor represents. I made no pretence as to what side I am on. I am right out for the good government of our borough; and, if the Mayor and his followers could give us that, I would be like your correspondent is now, unanimous with them. Their idea of managing the borough is fifteen minutes to business and the rest of the evening devoted to personal recrimination. He apparently does not know that ratepayers names go on the roll automatically; and that the onus is on the voter with an elector’s privilege to see that bis name is put on. It was these disinterested voters that Mr McChesney gathered in by the score, arid as I stated before, these are the people he represents. “Unanimous” still harps on about dropping personal feeling and I am sure we all agree in that. The only way out I can see is to drop the Mayor and his followers, who are continually introducing it, as instance the recent sanitary contract and its sequel In my last letter I asked “Unanimous” to suggest something better. He apparently overlooked that part of my letter. I am, etc., RATEPAYER. June 21, 1924.