CORRESPONDENCE

Taranaki Daily News, 6 June 1930, Page 12

CORRESPONDENCE

PARK FOOTBALL FEES. (To the. Editor.) Sir, —In recent issues of your journal I sought to ascertain what ground fee was charged for the recent match Britain v. Taranaki. Having received certain information from the chairman of the Taranaki Rugby Union, you attached a footnote to my letter. The information given you was simply inconsequential piffle —a clumsy, pitiful attempt to sidetrack a simple, perfectly legitimate and courteously worded question dealing with am important civic matter. In a second letter dealing with the same subject, which you, very kindly published a week ago, I referred to the fact that your footnote, based no doubt upon the T.R.U. chairman’s information, “did not touch my question at any point.” Furthermore, I then used the following words: “However, as the reply to my question may have been given carelessly but yet in good faith, may I appeal directly to the aforesaid T.R.U. officials to publish in your columns the information asked for.” Now, since those words were published seven days ago, neither the chairman (Mr. J. McLeod) nor the secretary (Mr, S. E. Nielson) has been courteous enough to reply. This being so, one would seem justified in concluding that the evasive answer in yg>ur aforesaid footnote was not “carelessly given” nor yet “supplied in good faith.” Indeed the subsequent silence of these two responsible officials surely warrants the conclusion that they consider themselves justified in treating the whole matter with contempt. At the moment one feels inclined to make further adverse comment, upon what now appears to be studied contumacy. Yet I am loth to write anything of a harsh nature lest the two officials implicated may have been absent from New Plymouth and, though dilatory, may still intend to reply. Therefore, with the most kindly feelings, and before dealing further with the matter at the moment, I appeal to the officials concerned to answer through your columns the following question: What ground fee was charged for the British v. Taranaki match? The public want to know. The public have a right to the information. The ratepayers financially interested. For the moment I leave the matter just here, trusting the T.R.U. will recognise its collective and individual obligations In this regard. May I conclude at this stage with the pertinent remark that the drowsy indifference of the New Plymouth Borough Council on the matter under discussion is not only difficult to understand, but is also, in my humble opinion, conclusive evidence that the interests of ratepayers are not being safeguarded.—l am, etc., W. H. HAWKINS. (In fairness to the chairman of the Taranaki Rugby Union it should be pointed out that he courteously made a statement on the subject as soon as he was approached, and therefore may feel that he has done all that is necessary.

The Taranaki Rugby Union, of course, is not responsible to the ratepayers in respect of ground fees and might properly reply that' if Mr. Hawkins desires in*, formation which he thinks. is due to ratepayers he should seek it from another Bourse. —Ed. Daily News).