HUTT BOROUGH AFFAIRS.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 576, 3 August 1909, Page 7

HUTT BOROUGH AFFAIRS.

MAJOR M'DONALD'S EVIDENCE'TAKEN. A LONG MKETWJ." . A special-meeting of the.Hntt Borough Council, was rieid last . night, . ovjUcnce in'.' conncctimi' With the oxpeiiditure oE the ■ £62,000-loan was heard;'llierb.'Wcfo present: 1 The Mayor''(air. K- IV.-Bunny), and Councillors- Baldwin, /Macaskill, .Barlow, Mayes, Anson, Clere, Mowbray,' anil. l'earco. .At tho outset,, the .Mayor said that lie proposed to take r the evidence of the' two ex-mayors 'in public, but ' that. of the otlier witnesses—servants an'd ; ex-servants of tho borough—in committee.;'.". ' ' t ". "" Councillor.. Baldwin' opposed this, contending that already too .much had been done • in committee. i . Councillors",'Alison, Clere, and. Mowbriiy spoke iii support of going into committee, wbjlo CtouHcillors Baldwin,-'Macaskill, arid BarloW. voted against ,Hlie. 'prbposal, which ' whs carried; ! Prior to ;tho motion being put. -, one of the witnesses^in' 'question . remarked 1 that if "his. evidence" was-, to be published ha would certainly decline to speakat all, seeing that' it would; ; hb considered; jeopardise his livelihood. ' . . ..." : Thb Mayors That was one of 'the reasons whj-':l;proposed that -it. should bq taken'in committee. — "-"■' r . The first witness •. oxaniiried .was Major M'Donald/ wli6 ; remarked' that" he was 'not i very clear." as ;tif-the intentions' or requirei mentis"of. the council' .as,, regarded''his evi'deiice.' ■ He : of any charges, that bad'been made in the, council in respect to' ■ the administration.- duringhis. term of office.. He camo.'simply as a witrioss.' Councillor Clero: Would you kindly toll us -whether; there -'Was any; unauthorised txpferidituro during your'' terni :of office?.' Of course, as : a memberof the then council .I feel jointly responsible.■'■ -■'.. Major -M'Donald wan't to' know'what yourterni ; unauthorised i'expendituro.. ;'I ditl riot - expend 1 one single'-penny -abovo - - tho atnount- authorised" by/the' ratepayers.''. Oil the other hand, I do know of works that were estimated ito cost'-' a certain amount, which-cost-,considerably inore. ""',<• I Qiffistioned- by' tho : Mayol-, Major -M'Dorialil 6tate"d 'tnat'one-of, th'o'jtems whichfesceedea tlie'.'es'tiiriated- cost " : -was ,l ;tlio Bridge-Stiiet drain'; : Tho council's''Estimate', was £458 iOs.y whereas tlio cost;".of 'the'' work'- carried ' out bv' Mr.' Rix-Trott .was '£737 16s. 9d. . Councillor Baldwin: My. balance-sheet 1 shows- that- Railway Avenue was included in, that amount; : - ; "Answering. ' further' questions, ■ ' Major . M'Doh'ald said that as /far,'as he: knew'the. surface'drainagei' wss estimatwl'to cost £930. The Mayor: ;Do you consider 'thatamount. . justified under tho ballot paper and the loan proposals. '. -' : ' 'Major' M'DohaldV If you ' say that "we fspkint "more money than'-'in'..the '-cngincer's report, : ,their.l,'say : yos. 'If'you say,wo-'e.x-betided the amount of inorieij wo {were "en- . titled v to ; by' tlio' ratepayers, I 'l say : 'wb did ■. not. ' ■■■.-v.v '- Councillor Anson'then asked if, at a statutory meeting of ratepayers,''the. then council gave its assurance thaij'the'£29,4oo.would ' 'ho' spent I -under'sepiratfc' headings .(which lie, Councillor"AnsOn, ■detailed)'.:'" v ■'. Major M'Donald: Certainly not/' '•; ' Touching on - another jpoint;" he ' said that lie" firmly believed that;' if his 'council had 'continued- in .'office, tho whole' of '■ tho'- loan works 1 -; "would "have - been completed for the estimated "amount, Further, in rofererico to sewerage .'work, ho Said that his cburicil liiidJ : spent £2000 put of the £4000. contingency'! fund; to'icbver the^ additional amourit .which tho engineer' said/it would cost. ; ;; : i ' Tho' Mayor': It has libcii mentioned' tliat £7000 inoro than Was' lepal was spent."; Can you justify that' excessive expenditure?: v ' 'Major M'Donald : ! It did riot take pliic'o . during my term of.bfiice;' In 'any'; ca'soMt - was not justified; ;'.- The Mayor: There was a sum of £17,000 • estimated, -and'a surii bf £23.000 expended. . Was there'any'excess of expenditure during • your - term?' ; -' .;. .'' Major M'Donald:• Xo! ~V' . " . , Couri'billor Baldwin hslred' .witness whether , be" surprised ,'tliatV'by 'deciding ',to.I ; »irioreaso r th(S hbrsb-ptriver of the watewvorks •brigni^si l!, ari',:-iid(litiqiial expense—some ' £16t!5: ! at-cd-^j accaunt^. <jf j, 'fcrease'd ibther'itcms;'; ! , Ma'jor-3f'Uoriald: .it 'doGs'.'BUrpriso rile.' ; -The -only 'increase; 'he added was in' ..respect' tlio sum'of £450; representing'additional ; •'cpst bn'thp ;engines.: '. ■ - Cotiqcillbr 'fMacaskill: ' Was ''jit] not; Only : :feas'6riablb, to expcct^' Jtbat'" tlip',mains' should ' : bo in'oreasbd in-proportion- the'extra.horfiepower of the engines? ;'" ' ; .'.'y.,, ' '■'Major M'Dbnald said'that nothing of-that, sort ; ppirited out :to...the.'couiicil by the engineer. ' ' fhp >Mayor Did 'you not. state ...tliat,. iii, consequenco of .day.;.'labour, : you. would . be. £600. to the good ? . ' ■. - tl , '; '. : V' j : .Witness:r replied ' that ho .hafl...stated .'.so; : ;relyihg;:npon Mr. Rix-Trott's, report to that effect..ln,' the' end,: however,' tho ; ; : saving turned".out, ; tombs' only .. , . On the subject of the increaEe in wages granted to the man working,on tlio!!oari con-: tracts, Major M'Donald said that hia council, far from granting "tho increase, (which was. recommended by. tho.engineer),' merely fixed a r maximum \'wage../ ''; Accoriling to .Courieillpr' Baldwin : tljiswas . tahtamoiint to granting an increase. . ' Answering other questions, Major. M'Don- . aid said that 'the .council ; did ,not ..authorise ;.tlis. work of lowering Railway Avenuo. / . ' Mr. Rix-Trott then,asked .witribss.. a, number' of-questions., ~■. .. , .t■ ■..... - , ': ;Iu answer to'one .or-vthese, witness-denied that .any mention of increased duty (some l£18o) on. thb water-Worlc3 engines had been 'made tp the. then- council. .... Replying to. Councillor.-Macaskill, witness, said that, while Mayor, he had implicit con* fidence in Mr. Rix-Trott. The only work in connection with" which lie had cause: to believe tho engineer had., made,, a „ mistake, was'the .cbristr'u'ctiori of tho reservoir. In answer , to. Mr., Purser; witness said that, during' the early part of his term of office,, the, toiy-Ji, clork.' had: drawh : ."his-. atf tentioh to "certain items, for works that were not included' in the engineer's report.'' , To Mr; Rix-Trott :-Mr. M'Donald said that vmuch of'' the- additional 3 wo.rk 5 and increased [.'expenditure in respect to sewage was' occa•pibned. by meeting • the requests of "deputawhich asked tliat certain work be performed., ■ • "•Mr. W. R. Russell, ex-deputy-mayor, next gave evidence. •' • [ ; The oournil then went into committee.' .•■ : - '