View report page

144
with selling land belonging to the Metropolitan Board, became
interested with the purchasers of such land; if indeed he was not
himself, whilst acting for the Metropolitan Board—the sellers,
already trafficking in the land as a purchaser. The whole matter
seems to have been admitted before the Metropolitan Board; but,
as appears to your suppliants, so low is that Board's sense of moral
duty, that they merely passed the following resolution, condemning
their officer and censuring his conduct, which censure has
even yet not been administered.
'That this Board is of opinion that none of its
officers should be interested in the financial success of any
dealings with the Board's properties, and considers that Mr.
Robertson's admitted financial connection with his brothers,
under the assumed name of Grey, in such dealings, and
especially the unauthorised substitution of one of his
brothers for Mr. Foster, a tenant appointed by the Board,
is most improper and deserving of censure.'
Your suppliants are alarmed at the low moral tone of a public
Board that could thus deal with so serious an offence of an official;
and your suppliants are under fears that the Members of the
Board, or an important number of them, may not be free agents
towards their officials, but may have dealings of their own which
they may not wish either to disclose or to have disclosed.
The fears, alarms, and amazement of your suppliants have
been greatly aggravated by the course the Metropolitan Board has
taken upon these matters being challenged in the public Press.
The judgment of your suppliants is, that there are a number of
the Members of the Metropolitan Board who are endeavouring to
hide something, or hush something up. That Board has refused
to appoint a Special Committee to enquire into the facts, but has
by a majority adopted the sham of appointing a Committee of
the whole Board, the very effect of which is, to put the Members