A Matter of Delicacy.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXIII, Issue 7365, 12 November 1898, Page 1

A Matter of Delicacy.

Included in the outward correspondence read by the Clerk at last night's meeting of the Borough Council was a letter to Messrs Hislop and Creagh instructing them to engage Mr Newton to appear in the action which the Council were instituting against Messrs J. and T. Meek for the recovery of a water account. Mr Milne asked why Mr Newton was engaged in this case. Was it because Mr Creagh felt a delicacy In proceeding against one of his clients ? because, if that were so, he (Mr Milne) thought it very peculiar that he should feel so seeing that he did not experience any delicacy in acting for the Council some time since in a similar action where he (Mr Milne) was interested, he also being & client of the firm. The Mayor was proceeding to say that he had thought, it advisable to instruct Mr Creagh to engage Mr Newton, when Councillor Hamilton rose to ask if Messrs Hislop and Creagh, as the borough solicitors, were not able to conduct a small case such as this was, and if the Council were pay for the extra counsel. I£ it were delicacy that prompted the course, he thought it was false delicacy. , t i , The Mayor said he was responsible for the letter baying been written. Councillor Hamilton asked if Mr Newton was to appear at the Council's or Messrs • Hislop and Creagh's expense. The Mayor said the Council would certainly not have to pay both; Councillor Milne said he did not find iault if it were intended to get the best advice, but he wished to know if Mr Creagh had expressed any feelings- of delicacy in having to proceed against Mr Meek.Councillor Hamilton asked if Mr Meek had expsesßed any reason why Mr Creagh should;not appear. . .Councillor Milne said that in asking the question he had .purposely refrained . from using Mr Meek's name, and he did not think any allusion to that effect was necesHamilton said Councillor Milne in his remarks had indicated feelings of delicacy, and he did not consider that point at- all. But he wished to know if the Council were to pay for two counsel when one Bhould be enough. The Mayor said that;this was a somewhat complicated case, and he considered a second counsel necessary. The letter w&b therefore written. . . Councillor Hamilton again objected _to Councillor Milne in a negative way saying that if he had been Mr Meek he would not have objected to Mr Creagh proceeding against him. . , Milne rose to a point of order. He had never said what Councillor Hamilton attributed $o him. • ; • • The Mayor said he understood that it was tfoe tone of the letter Councillor Milne remarked about. If an error of judgment had beon made the blame rested with him. _ Councillor Brown said the Mayor had spok en to him/about thiE|matter, and he had concurred with the opinion that it would be advisable to get Mr Newton. Councillor Hamilton said his objection was onl V upon the score of expense. Councillor Hedley: There's one thing your Worship I would like to know. Was Mr Creagh's concurrence obtained ? if so there will be no extra expense. The-Mayor: Oh, yea; Mr Creagh was consulted. Councillor Hedley: In that case, your Worship, yon were quite justified in sending the letter. The Council will only have to pay for one solicitor. ' Councillor Cagney: It's all the same expense to the CoonciL Councillor Hamilton was again expressing the opinion that if Mr Creagh was unable to conduct the business of the Council, but was cut short by the Mayor saying, "Well, we'll; go o>» with the next business," and the I CJlerk read the next letter.