SOME RECRIMINATIONS

Stratford Evening Post, Issue 70, 4 August 1927, Page 5

SOME RECRIMINATIONS

EAILWAT BOARD DEPUTATION ''LAWYERS AT LOGGERHEADS. - - Ml * ; . * ; " *"■'*>..•■ . At' last."night's meeting of the Chaipber of Commerce Mr S. Macailster, ■ said that the Chamber had appointed delegates to attend the deeutation to tb.e member a of the Railway Board; and* his view was 'that those delegates should, have endeavoured to support the object the Chamber had in view. 'The chairman's attitude had been rpiite correct, but he did not think" Mr Thomson had acted Mr Thonaspn's remarks were opposed|to the fishes of the Chamber. :The object, of the. delegates should .have heen to support the request o«> the lessees. If Mr Thomson did not agree-with the Chamber's view'he Bhould have said so and declined to act as delegate. He thought there, Should be an understanding on thei matter for the future. He thought; Mr Thomson's attitude was an un-j t&\v Vohe for anybody to adopt in the circumstances. tNO r ;CAIfsE FOR COMPLAINT.

.; Mr. Thomson said he could not see that. Mr Macalister or the other members .of the Chamber had any caiusef lor complaint as regards the remarks he had made before the Railway Board. In his opening remarks he had adopted a course followed by counsel' in the putting the argument of the other side forward first. He had certainly, expressed the hope that the Board would meet the wishes of the lessees to the fullest extent possible, iitd do what they could to make the tenants a satisfied section of the £6mmunity and encourage them ,to put further improvements on their ■leaseholds. He did not to «e personal, but he was) not satisfied that Mr Macalister was justified in the remarks he had made. Porhaps'Mr Macalister's advocacy fnight had done his clients , more harm than anything he (the speaker) had said. Mr Macalister said he had been | instrumental in bringing the Board to Stratford. Mr Thomson's remarks had been utterly valueless to the lessees. His own contention that the Act gave no right to compensation was perfectly right, although the Act did not make it C6 Mr Thomson: Do you suggest.; that I have any interest in damag-, ing the interests of the lessees? ; Mr W. MacDonald: Are you acting as advocate for the Railway Board? IS IT A JOKE? Mr Thomson: Do you want to treat the matter as a joke? Mr MacDonald: Am I to have an answer to my question? Mr Thomson: I do not think it worthy of any attention. i i The chairman (Mr J. B. Richards) said he deprecated any such attacks round the table Members met for the purpose of doing the best possible for the town and distrMr Thomson: That i 8 what I have *£ MacDonald: The rule should apply .both at the meetings and out--8 id 6 Mr Thomson: Does anybody suggest that I have done otherwise? The chairman: Do you want a resolution passed, Mr MacaUtor _ Mr Macalister: I think there should be an understanding. Do you think Mr Thomson acted rignt %t Richards: I do not care to express an opinion. Mr Macalister:' I saw * large JSL on the face of the chairman Boar" when Mr Thomson was persists in being V^* able to say something of the sou present looked upon you as an vocate for the Board. , Mr H. F. Fleming: They uo all agree with you. Mr Macalister: Well, there is y Mr Fleming: I am not the one. I know others. The matter then dropped.