THE Inangahua Times, PUBLISHED TRI-WEEKLY. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1881.

Inangahua Times, Volume II, Issue II, 3 August 1881, Page 2

THE Inangahua Times, PUBLISHED TRI-WEEKLY. WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 3, 1881.

The following reference to the now famous Inanqalma deputation appears in the New Zealand Mail of the 23rd July last :— " With reference to the article we published last week upon deputations, and particularly referring to a deputation of two from the Inangahua County Council, we have received the following telegram from the chairman of the Council, who evidently bad been advised by wire of the purport of the article. He gays :—' Touching your comment! upon an article that appeared in the Inanga* bua Times of tbe Ist instant, 1 take the liberty of informing you that the Inanga* bua County Council holds its meetings once every three months ; that all busi' ness U carried on by an Executive Committee, duly appointed by resolution of the Council, that a majority of the Council was consulted as to tbe advisability of sending a deputation to Wei* lington on Council matters, and that such majority fully concurred in the appoint* ment of Messrs iDayies and Byrne, the two gentlemen at present representing the Inangahua County Counoil at Wellington. Be kind enough to insert this i telegram in your n?xt issue. (Signed) Patrick Brennan, Chairman Inangahua County Council." Tbe Mail goes on to say:— "We publish the above with much pleasure ; party feeling evidently ■ runs high at Inangahua, and hence this affair of the deputation has been highly colored. We are now aware that the > two delegates came here at very great inconvenience to themselves, and some monetary loss through neglecting their private business." The Chairman of the Council having thus put us to the proof : of our remark's concerning the manner in which the sotcalled deputation was ap- > peinted, we Bjhall lay the facts before the 1 publio and people may judge for them ■ selves. We make tbe following extract from tbe published minutes of the meeting at which the deputation was ap-i pointed :— " A meeting of the Executive Committee was held in the Council Chambers on Friday, June 24tb, 1881, at 8 p.m. Present: Councillors Davies, > Byrne, and Brennan (Chairman.) The I Chairman suggested that a deputation from the Inangabqa County Council , should proceed at (type, to 'Wellington to interview Ministers on the matter of main roads and*other public works with* in the County. It was resolved that Crs. Byrne and Davies proceed at once to Wellington and that reasonable expenses be allowed." Thus it will ,1? e seen that the whole business was done by three members, precisely as we have already shown. Put it will be observed that the Chairman in his telegram to the Wei* , lington paper does not deny that we correctly stated the number present at Executive meeting. He says that a , majority of the members of ithe Council were " consulted " as to the advisability of sending a deputation to Wellington, and fully concurred in the appointment of those sent. Well, let us see how far , the truth of this is borne out. We have , the authority "of Councillors Trennery and Plaslcett for saving |hat they knew not biog whatever about the deputation, ; were in no way consulted in the matter, • and wholly disapprove of the proceodF tog. Councillor Caplea was absent in , Tasmania at the time, and therefore could not have been any party to it, and Councillor Feeban was at Boatman's when tbe meeting toojk place, and has stated tbat he knew nothing of tbe deputation until after the appointment. Here then we have four councillors out pf the eight who were neither consulted before hand nor approved of the step taken, so that a majority in favor of the deputation can only be made but with the casting vote of the db'ajrtnan, who has therefore tifcen upon himself tbe entire responsibility of the deputation. Our Wellington contemporary 1 will . therefore see' that the facts have not been at all' colored , and we are pot a' little surprised that its conductors 'should have allowed tb'emselfes to be prfya'My ear" wigged to sucjb a conclusion.' We again condemn tbe whole proceeding a,s irregular, unwarranted, and leading to an utter waste of public money. '