MATATOKI DRAIN.

Thames Star, Volume LVII, Issue 15845, 26 May 1923, Page 5

MATATOKI DRAIN.

(To the Editor.)

Sir. —Will you -kindly allow me space in your paper to criticise some of the proposals carried at the Thames County special meeting. A report was put in by the foreman on the Matatoki drain and the recent fiood. The contractor wanted £l3 extra.

Cr, McCormick said the council had let a contract for the drain and the settlers had to pay for it, He thought that any additional expense should be borne by the one who caused the damage.

Now I take it the Almighty God caused the flood. I have not that power, so th e Council can get to work. Cr. Cox said the contractor was willing to carry out his contract and he thought no more money should be paid him. Cr. McCormick said the extra money was deserved as the drain was in a bad state owing to th e recent flood —it was a flood this timfe, not damage.

'But here is the aim of some of the?councillors, or I am -very much mistaken: The chairman said they should call for fresh tenders, and Cr. Cox supported” this, and it was decided upon that if the tenders are higher then action',will he taken for the extra amount against the person who caused the damage. Now, Sir, a ten-year-old schoolboy could see -the point. The councillors say to the contractor: “Raise your tender £lO, £2O, or £3O, and we will frighten''Maxwell into paying it.” (We shall see.)

Cr. Alley said the farms would be no use without the drain. It was was really an outlet Matatoki Creek'. (Calls of: No! No!) I.f Cr. Alley is wrong, then in the name of goodness, where does the Matatoki Creek go? > Now, Sir, this is a fair request that Crs. McCormick, Cox, Faith-full and the chairman meet me at Matatoki store by appointment so as tc give both the council and me a fair deal. Personally. lam eager for the fray in open Court. I am, etc.,

A K. MAXWELL,