To the Editor of the "NontH-Cuiva Datty News."
Sin—The two land commission cases cited in my yesterday's letter fare reported on Page 198 of the Municipal Gazette of May 16 where we read that "Mr. Robinson stated
Jnission was interested in an adjacent myers nominee In the Land Com-Mr. J.T. W. Brooke; the rate:
lot on Race Course Road, he would take no part in these two cases."
If "you still think that Mr. Brooke's private occupation causes him no inconvenience nor clashes with his duties on the Land Commission, 1 can only say that my view of what is inconvenience and what is duty differ profoundly from yours. To me it always seemed an error of judgment both on Mr. Brooke's part in letting his name be put forward as ratepayers' representative on the Land Commission and on your part (in your private capacity as ratepayer) in proposing him, while subsequent events have shown that the judgment of the last Annual ratepayers' meeting cannot now be quoted as being of much value.
However, the election of Mr. Brooke is & fait accompli and it wax not my intention to eviticize him in my previous letter, nor would T have reverted to the subject to-day bul for your editorial in his defence. My object was rather to urge that lo in the appoint: not be repeated the appointment of Land Assessors.
Tam, ete,
Text read from the printed page and cleaned; old type leaves the occasional error.