Page:Item 8 1860.pdf/77

once to have declined serving, or to have brought the subject forward at the last meeting. There was no question but what the other gentlemen on the Committee thought that they could put him on the shelf when they liked, and take him down again at their convenience. He next recapitulated what had occurred in committee; that the Postmaster-General had appointed to meet the deputation on the 20th of November, and that at the meeting of the committee when this letter was read, Mr. Bromley moved a resolution that the Mayor and Aldermen Ginner and Ross should be the deputation. To that resolution he demurred, and told the other members of the committee that he was put upon it for the express purpose of representing the West Ward before the Postmaster-General. After the resolution had been carried, he asked for a copy of the resolution passed by the Council, and on maintaining his right to go with them Ald. Ginner appealed to the Town Clerk as to the legal bearing of the resolution of the Council. The reply was that the resolution just passed was illegal, and that Mr. Gausden had a right to accompany the deputation. Messrs. Ginner and Ross then said they would not go, and Mr. Ginner afterwards moved a resolution that the Postmaster-General should be informed it was not convenient for the deputation to wait upon him then. He also said he should bring it before the Council. Now, he (Mr. Gausden) appealed to the Council to say if that was the treatment that a member of one of its committees ought to receive? He maintained that if he were appointed on a committee by the Council that it was unfair for any other member of the commitee(sic) to endeavour to get him passed over. If there were facts and circumstances to be stated, he maintained that he had a right to speak upon them; and he felt surprised that two gentlemen such as Mr. Ginner and Mr. Ross – both gentlemen who had held the highest office in the borough – should treat another member of the Council in the way they had acted towards himself. He said the character of straightforward Englishmen would not bear that sort of conduct. He then replied to Mr. Ginner’s assertion that the fortnight’s return of mis-directed letters was taken during one of the smallest fortnight’s in the year, by giving the following figures obtained from official sources as the average weekly number of letters received at the St. Leonards post-office. In 1859 the average weekly number was 8067; in April, 8273; in July, 6388; and in October 9,264. So that in October there was an increase of 1197 letters in one week over that of January. Then in 1860, the weekly average -