BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Globe, Volume IV, Issue 321, 23 June 1875, Page 2

BOROUGH COUNCIL.

LYTTELTON.

Monday, June 21.

The weekly meeting was held as usual, at 7.80. Present—His Worship the Mayor, Crs Chalmers, Hawkins, Buist, Graham, Murray, Y oung, Grange. The clerk stated he had received since last meeting £67 18s. Correspondence was read from Mr J. Ollivier, the provincial auditor, asking for information regarding the various rates levied in the borough during the past year. From Mr Henry Hutchinson, of Voelas road, Dampier’s Bay, complaining of the muddy state of the road, which rendered it almost imnassable for vehicles. It was arranged that the chairman of the works committee should inspect the road aid report on the same at the next weekly meeting. Tenders were opened for laying the culvert in Oxford and London streets from Messrs Forester and Stinson, and Mr Stinson’s tender was accepted. With regard to the levels fn Canterbury street, the Mayor said he had received a letter from the Borough Solicitor, pointing out that there had been an alteration in the Act of 1867, which had been superseded by the Amendment Act of 1871, and that they would have to take new steps before they could proceed in the matter. The question was—Did the Council wish to begin afresh ?

Cr Chalmers did not think this amendment could be intended in such a case as this, which was merely filling up a hole in the side of a street that had already existed for fourteen years. Their laws were now getting so complicated through amendments that no one would be able to understand them at all shortly but a council of lawyers. Cr Graham proposed, and Cr Chalmers seconded —“ That the matter be at once proceeded with under the Municipal Corporations Act, 1871. Carried. Accounts were passed amounting to £46 11s 9d. His Worship then read a draft of the proposed bye-law regarding swine kept in the borough, and it was agreed, after it had been formally passed—“ That it should be formally considered for the second time on the 19th July, notice of same to be advertised weekly.” Cr Chalmers rose and read the following notice of motion standing in his name:— “ That tenders be invited from parties willing to undertake to impound cattle found in the streets ; and contingent on the above being passed, that a specification of conditions be prepared for parties tendering.” He said he had observed that the Lincoln Road Board had had to pass a similar measure, and he thought if it was necessary in that district, which was more than half pastoral, it was surely needful in that town. The police did aid, but their duty kept them away from that part of the town Cr Young seconded the motion, which was carried unanimously. Cr Chalmers then moved the following—- “ That a specification be prepared to

effect that the party accepted will receive such recognition as servant of the Borough Council as will enable him to appear to prosecute, &c, by Council authority. That the usual amount of fines be inflicted, arrangement to be terminable by notice on either side. Tenderers to state what proportion of the fines they expect as remuneration, or in other words tenders to be at so much per cent of the fines recovered. Lowest or any tender not necessarily to be accepted.” Cr Young seconded the motion, which passed. Cr Grange rose to move the following notice of motion standing in his name—- “ That in the event of the Provincial Government not taking immediate action, that an advertisement must be imerted in the official paper stating that this Council will not hold itself responsible for any damages arising from any accident that shall occur on Governor’s Bay road from this date.” In doing so he stated that this was owing to Mr Cowlin’s letter saying that he would hold the Council responsible for any damage done to his vehicle or horses on the Governor’s Bay road. As the Government had promised to take charge of the road he thonght it only right that all liability should be removed from the Council. Cr Murray seconded the motion. The Mayor said that a letter had been written to the Executive on the matter, but they had not yet returned an answer. He would ask Cr Grange to wait a few days till they did receive an answer. After some further discussion the motion was carried.

The following report of the works committee on Sumner road was read;—"The whole of the side channels to be cleared from Officers’ Point to the top of the Zig zag. Slips on the road to be removed, and sufficient to be taken away at these places that the side channels may not be stopped by the next fall of rain. Two culverts of stone, ■one 27ft long, 16inin the clear, and one 20ft long and 14in in the clear, to be placed at Sticking Point and the foot of the Zig zag. From 150 to 200 yards of metal will be required on different parts of the road. On the Zig-zag some eight or ten yards of pitching is required. The walls also want repairs, and some posts and rails are wanting, and in many places the overhanging banks will have to be sloped. Many small matters also require to be attended to all along the road, and the committee recommend that the keeping of the side channels clear for twelve months be let by tender.— William Graham, Chairman.”

Its adoption was moved by Cr Graham and seconded by Cr Buist. Cr Graham made a statement regarding the difficulty of drawing up a specification for the use of tenderers. He advised that the culverts should be done under the superintendence of the foreman, and gave a further account of the state of the road, and said that it had taken himself and the foreman two half-days to merely view it. He would advise that £lO or £l2 should be reserved out of the £IOO for the purpose of keeping the channels clear. With regard to Cr Grange’s statement as to the frittering away the money of the Council, he must now make a few remarks, as the matter had gone forth to the public. £2400 had been spent during the past year, and he could aver that the works committee had done their best to make that money go as far it would in works for the good of the town. He was desirous that the Council should give some expression of opinion as to their confidence in the works committee. He was surprised that Or Grange should have made such a statement. If an outsider had done so, well and good ; but for a member, who knew something of what was done, to make such a statement, was unkind. After the time and trouble that the works committee took, to be attacked by people who only sat at that table and talked, was very irritating, and unless the Council expressed their entire confidence and satisfaction with what had been done by the works committee, he would resign, and make room for some one else. Or Grange said he might stand alone in this matter of letting tenders, but during the week two people had asked him if tenders were to be'let for repairing the Sumner road; The works committee said that it was almost impossible to let such a thing by tender, but in the face of this these men asked the nature of the work that they might send in an estimate, and he still thought that making out the specifications was not an insurmountable difficulty. He was glad to be in the society of gentlemen who, like himself, did nothing. As to his previous statement about the money being frittered away, he not only affirmed it, but would swear that the money was not spent with sound judgment. No doubt the works on the Dampier’s Bay road had been carried further than was intended, but if it was a success it was no more than the locality required ; but he was sure some unnecessary works had been done. [Or Graham—Name.] He said that particular locality he referred to had reaped two-thirds of the whole money. He would ask if the works in St David street had been carried out in their proper routine ?

Or Chalmers said that Or Grange had said they (the works committee) had frittered away the money entrusted to them; he had been asked to prove it, and as a reply had taken the unusual course of taking an oath that it was correct without bringing forward a single fact. He was not on the defensive ; they had nothing to defend. He had intended to have helped Cr Grange in showing how the money had been frittered away; there were some cases, for instance, £l6 had been frittered away, not on fritters but on buns, and they had been abused for this in the public prints; then there was the drainage map, that £2O had not been very usefully expended, as he seldom or never saw the map used. No one could say that the works committee had done anything to satisfy the rapacity of any of their needy dependants. The adoption of the report, which was ■considered as equal to a vote of confidence in the works committee, was then put and carried. Or Hawkins moved, and Cr Murray seconded —“That the repairs to the Sumner road be carried out as speedily as possible.” Carried. Or Graham moved—“ That tenders be called for 600 yards of metal, to be delivered according to the specification of the works committee.” Cr Chalmers said it was desirable, but a ■question if they could afford it. The motion was seconded by Cr Buist, and carried. Cr Graham said he had seen Mr Cunningham about the drainage by Peacock’s wharf, and that gentleman had stated he would help the works committee in making matters tight. He had also inspected Mr Robinson’s

culvert, and thought that nuisance might be stopped. Mr Nalder had complained of the bad road to his house, and when they were at work on the Sumner road, they could clear the drain and metal it. Other gentlemen, such as Mr Allwright, who had done something towards the roads to their houses in the. same locality, should be considered, and he would attend to the matter. The Council then adjourned.