Page:Item 8 1860.pdf/76

We agreed to ask the Postmaster-General for an interview at a future day, which he has granted us. We therefore resolved to make another appeal to this Council to get the old committee discharged and another appointed. I shall end with a motion to that effect, but before I do so I wish to make a correction in one of my remarks. When I spoke about the delay of letters I had no notion – so quiet have the postal arrangements been kept – that a special messenger was set apart for sending the misdirected letters arriving by the morning mail to St. Leonards for the early delivery. I had no idea of this arrangement, and therefore in so far as those letters were concerned I was in error. But that fact of itself was the most condemnatory. Why should there be a postal messenger to convey the misdirected letters between the two towns? [And why, Mr. Ginner, did your usual intelligence so forsake you as to make so illogical a question possible? You and others acting with you, made the number of misdirected letters the burden of your complaint; and so, because an additional letter-carrier was put on to remedy the allegd(sic) evil, you declared that “it condemned the Post Office more than anything else.” Mr. Gausden will show you, further on, that of your 17,000 misdirected letters (erroneously estimated), 9,000 at least suffered no delay in the delivery from this arrangement alone. A careful reasoner would conclude that your admitted ignorance of this remedial arrangement was more condemnatory of your own want of care in ascertaining facts than it was of the Post-Office authorities]. Ald. Ginner having expressed his belief that the number of mis-directed letters was even greater than he had stated, and being asked by Mr. Gausden if he could give the figures, replied that he could not, and had a special reason for not doing so. He concluded by moving that the former resolution of the Council be rescinded. Ald Ross seconded, without comment. Coun. Gausden denied that he had made use of the expression attributed to him by Mr. Ginner, but Coun. Bromley, although he did not on this occasion shout “tell him it's a lie, sir,” strongly asseverated that he did. What he did say (continued Mr. G.) was, that unquestionably his appointment was that he should go to the Postmaster-General, and in opposition to them. The motion before them involved a very serious question – the independent action and voice of the Council [Hear, hear! from Mr. Howell]. There was no question about it. Mr. Ginner had brought forward the motion without any fresh argument to which was used when he (Mr. Gausden) was appointed on the Committee; and when it was stated to the Council what had taken place since the last discussion, he thought they would say with him that if Mr. Ginner did not choose to go, he ought at -