AKAROA COUNTY COUNCIL.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume VI, Issue 587, 28 February 1882, Page 2

AKAROA COUNTY COUNCIL.

A meeting of this Council was held yesterday. Present —Messrs Baker (Chairman), R. R. Bradley, J. Gebbie, W. Barnetl,G. R. Joblin, J. Boleyn, W. Masefield, and J. Pettigrew. MINUTES. The minutes of last meeting were read and confirmed. MR Armstrong's claim. The Chairman said the meeting had been called to reconsider the offer to Mr Armstrong. As Tuesday was tlio last day on which an amended offer could be sent in, it was necessary to have the meeting. He would read the following letter from Mr Wilkin and report from Messrs Wilkin and E. S. Latter on the subject:— " Akaroa, 23rd Feb. 1882. " Balguerie road diversion through Mr '• Armstrong's land. "By direction of the clerk to your Council, I enclose a plan of this diversion, showing severance, etc.. in Mr Armstrong's section 16708. I have also, as instructed, put in fencing pegs on both sides from the creek (peg 21) to near Messrs Wright and Kedge's boundary (peg 32), but find that the original survey and grade pegs from 1 to 20 have for the most part disappeared, owing to ihe formation of a logging track to the mill, which has been erected since the road was laid out in May, 1880. To put in fencing pegs for this distance will therefore necessitate clearing the old lines of the debris of the logging track and surveying to find the true positions of the missing pegs, and I have thought it better not to do so until after you have considered the report of Mr Latter and myself, which will be laid before yon to-day. It you still wish the fencing pegs put in please instruct me to that effect. Before concluding, I also wish to call your attention to a small difference in the acreage on accompanying plan, and that which appeared on the original plan now in Wellington. In the latter it was 3ac 3rd 34pch, and in the former it is 3ac 3rd 26pch. This difference is caused by Mr Seaton, the Government surveyor, now on the ground, having placed the old road through IG7OB, 46 links more to the southward, thus making the diversion connect with it 4G links sooner, and become consequently so much shoiter. —Yours, etc., i; W. D. Wilkin." "Aknro.l, 25th Feb., 1882.

" Bnlgiu»rie rond diversion and fencing. '' We have jointly examined the Jii.es of the road through Mr George Armstrong's property, rural section 16708, and bag to report on them as follows :—lst The portion from peg No. 1 (see plan) to near peg 9 is good fencing ground on both sides. 2nd From peg No. 9 to peg No. 22 is a bad fencing line, owing to tho west side of road coming in places into the creek bed ; and the east side being partly on a steep stony siding. 3rd From peg 22 to peg 30. rather rough and in some places very stony ground. 4th From peg 30 to end good fencing ground. stb From peg No. 9 to near peg No. 30, a distance of about 24 chains, the road is encumbered with green bush and dry scrub, which we estimate will cost at least 8s per chain to clear for fencing, say £9 6s. The material for fencing will have to be procured from a distance, as it is not likely to be obtainable in the immediate vicinity. Under these circumstances we think it unlikely that contractors will tender under 35s per chain for a post, rail and 6 wire fence, equalising about £140; add for the clearing as above £9 6s ; total £149 6s ; making, say, 37s 4d per chain all round, which is 7s 4d per chain over Mr Armstrong's oiter.—Yours, etc., •' W. D. Wilkin, " Licensed Surveyor and Engineer. " Edward S. Latter, "Clerk of Council." Mr Masefield explained the matter and moved "That Mr Geo. Armstrong be offered the price named in his claim by him of 30th Dec, 1881, for fencing diversion of the Balguerie road through his property, viz., 79£ chains at 30s per chain, making a total of £119 ss, the Council still holding to their offer of paying him the price of the land, viz., £10 per acre." Mr Bradlny seconded the resolution which after discussion whs carried. PETITION. The following petition from MrJ-HE. Thaeker was read :— " That your petitioner was anxious, for many reasons, to have a small portion of the Old Okain's Bay road closed, and applied accordingly to the Okain's Bay Boad Board to have same carried out, if not causing any inconvenience or loss to others by so doing. That the Board approved of said closing, and, after having advertised tho contemplated stoppage for three months, called a meeting of ratepayers to show cause why it should not be closed. That at said meeting, attended by all ratepayers interested, a resolution proposing its. stoppage was moved by Mr J. B. Barker, a member of the Board, and carried unanimously. That notwithstanding all parties interested, save one, being favorable to said stoppage, your honorable Council, owing to misrepresentations, resolved it should remain open. That your petitioner could not have been present when the subject was being discussed, having public duties to attend to, and.now. begs that your honorable Council will, reconsider its decision, and give him an opportunity to be heard in the matter."

The Chairman said Mr Thacker was in attendance ; would the Council hear his explanation.

Mr Joblin objected to re-opening the matter. It would be an endless affair, and no court could satisfy both plaintiff: and defendant.

Messrs Gebbie and Masefield also agreed, Mr Gebliie saying if the matter were reopened due notice should be given to those opposed to the closing o£ the road to be present, and Mr Masefield remarking that Mr Thacker'a course would be to get a petition signed an numerously as the one presented against the closing of the road.

The Chairman ruled that according to ■section 4 sub-section g of the Public Works Act, 1880, the Council had no power to reconsider the matter for two years. Mr J. Gebbie moved and 'Mr Bindley eeconded "That in reply to Mr J. E. Thacker's petition asking the to reconsider their decision re keeping open part of the old Dkain's Bay road, that he be informed that under section 4, sub-section g of the Public Works Act, 1880, the Council cannot take any proceedings for two years from Jan. 28th 1882 (Carried).

THE RAILWAY SIDING TO LAKE FORSYTH. Letters from the various Road Boards were read, heartily agreeing with the Council that the siding to the Lake was useless

[The resolutions having already appeared in reports of the meetings of the various bodies, we do not repeat them.] A communication was also read from the Government, saying that the matter would be considered.

PETITION. The following petition was read :— '•TaiTapu, February, 1882. » Sir,—We, the undersigned ratepayers, beg to call the attention of your Council to the annexed resolution passed at the annual meeting of ratepayers of the Little River road district, held January 6, 1882 ; and further, respectfully to suggest that should you take action in the matter referred to, a competent person should be appointed to report upon tho best mode of successfully carrying out the work of permanently lowering the water in the lagoons at Ahuriri. We are confident the Selwyn County Council, knowing the urgent neceßsity for the work, will, co-operate by paying part of the cost, and as it is the first work we have asked your Council to undertake in this part of the county we do so with confidence. Resolution passed at annual meeting—' That this meeting have decided upon the urgent necessity of applying to the Akaroa County Council as to the desirability of using means of lowering the lagoons at Ahuriri; and that a petition be forwarded to the said Council with the view of obtaining tho necessary means to carry out the above desirable work.' (Signed) "John Zimmerman, and 18 others."

Mr Gebbie said that it was thought a channel could be cut through a dry ridge to take the ovfirllovv of water away, as the river was unable to take away the surplus water in time of flood. He thought the Council should communicate with the Selwyn Council and get a report on the matter in conjunction with them. It was hardly a Road Board matter, as the Road Board boundaries were at the high water jiiaik of the Lake and this was o»t ide that boundary. Ho moved "That in reply to the petition of the residents in the Tai Tnpu Riding, forwarded by the Little River Road Board, asking the Council to appoint some competent person to report on the best means of permanently lowering the water in the Ingoon fit Ahuriri. That the Felwyn County Council be asked it co-operate with this Council in having a report drawn up o£ the best means of lowering the water in the lagoon." Seconded by Mr Joblin and carried. DOG TAX. Mr Gebbie said he had been asked by several people if sheep dogs were exempt from taxation this year and at what age a dog had to be registered. Tho Clerk explained that the only power the Council had was to lower the dog tax as low as Oβ if they thought it necessary. Shaep dogs were not exempt, the only dogs exempted being those in the rabbit districts. The ago at which a dog had to be registered was 6 months.

THE DRAINAGE OF LAKE ELLESMERE. The Sub-committee appointed reported as follows : —

"Gentlemen. —By resolution of this Council at its sitting on the 28th January, we were appointed a committee to proceed to the Lake Ellesniere Reserve, and to ascertain by personal observation and by the acquisition of information from those competent and willing to afford it. Ist. Emphatically whether the existence of the line of railway that is upon the lake reserve be, or be not, imperilled by the waters of the lake. 2nd. Whether means could be devised for the utiiiantion of the ! lake reserve by permanently keeping its waters at their lowest level. In pursuance of these objects we all assembled at Little River on the morning of Monday the 20th inst., and at a meeting then held Mr G-. R. Joblin was on the motion of Mr Masefield, seconded by Mr Boleyn, appointed chairman. The Borough of Akaroa had for their own information am) purposes, deputed their Mayor to accompany your committee, and Mr C. Watkins (civil engineer) on the invitation of Mr Joblin did the same. These gentlemen assisted in our proceedings throughout, aiding by suggestions and willing services. To Mr Watkins , we arc much beholden,

for to his kind efforts we arc indebted for

--the plans which accompany this report. JBV(fter receiving evidence at Little Itiver Sγ we proceeded to the railway, and followed ' the lire to the lake reserve, a distance of about 12 miles, obtaining evidence as we a went, and reaching Leeston on Tuesday night the 21st inst. On thie journey we passed over or through every river and stream that contributes its waters to the Jake, and obtained information of the principal features by which they are characterized. At Leeston and its neighborhood further evidence was obtained- That treating of the most important points is subjoined. All the evidence received indicates that the existence of the line would be greatly endangered in a heavy gale, and this impression is confined by our personal observation. We were not concerned with the structure ■of the line, but believe it to be, whatit f appears to be, a sound and substantial erection ; but the works designed to pro • tect it from the violence of the lake are insuOicient for that purpose. In design ing the line, tlm exceptional character of ;|]i. ■ ■ ;i'iiP:i jiln'iioni'Tia ch«rai-terizing th«

;;,!;•■ linen no! .lpM':::i!' to IIUVO litUM H/COgnised or sufficiently appreciated. In relation to the utilisation of the lake

reserve, we believe that the suggests• embankment would answer the purpose of reclaiming that reserve, and securing the line from all danger of injury from the lake waters. " G. R. JOBLIN. " W. T. Masefield. "James Bolkv^. '• \V. Bakn'Ett."

Mr Joblin said that they would have liked to get more evidence than they had, but the sub-sommittee could not afford greater time, He would like to rend the evidence they had taken * Mr Joblin said that this was the evidence of which they had taken notes. The extreme length of the embankment was some 20 chains and the sum mentioned by Mr Watkins as required for constructing the embankment was so small that he did not like to mention it, merely a frnetion of the amount mentioned by Mr Johnstone. When he and Mr Watkins were there on the lOtli February, though the wind was off the land and it was two and a half hours after high tide, the salt water was coming over the shingle into the Lake. Ihe Chairman asked whether any one was prepared with a resolution on the subject. Mr Joblin said that he should like to hear what other members thought on the subject. When the supplementary report was received he should be in favor of communicating with the Government, showing them the danger the railway was in, and if that was not efficacious, would propose a deputation should be sent. Hβ believed the line was in danger, and that the Government only wanted to know about the matter to move in it The Government's ignorance of the locality was shown by the way the licensing districts had been divided. Mr Masefield spoke at length on the matter. He thought the whole weight of evidence was to the effect that the line was in great danger from the sea water coining over. Mr Pettigrew asked if the body of water in the enclosed 200 acres would be sufficient to keep the channel clear. Mr Gebbie thought the wash from the 200 acres would not be sufficient to keep the mouth of the lake open, if not backed up by the waters of the lake. However, he was not an engineer, and felt it was undoubtedly requisite to take the opinion of one on this matter. Undoubtedly the greater part of the water in the lake came from the sea. After much further discussion, it was resolved, on the motion of Mr Gebbie, seconded by Mr Masefield—" That the consideration of the report of the Lake Ellesmere Committee he deferred until next meeting of the Council, ACCOUNTS. Accounts amounting to £6 6a were passed for payment. VOTES OF THANKS. Mr Masefield proposed a hearty vote of thanks to Mr Watkins for kindly preparing the plans regarding the drainage of Lake Ellesmere. That gentleman had kindly given his services out of pure love of the work, and deserved at least a vote of thanks. This was seconded by Mr Bradley and carried. A hearty vote of thanks was also passed to the Sub-committee who had visited the Lake. NOTICE OF MOTION. Mr Barnett gave notice that at the next meeting of the Council he would move "That the following resolution passed at a meeting of the Council, held on Nov 26, 1879 :—' That at any time any money is allocated to the Okain's Buy Road Board, that the cost of regrading the Summit Road as described in the last resolution be charged against that Board ' be rescinded." ADJOURNMENT. The Council then adjourned sine die. [The evidence, which is very lengthy and will appear in a subsequent issue owinj; to the present pressure on our space, was then read.]