DRAINAGE BOARD.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 907, 22 May 1877, Page 3

DRAINAGE BOARD.

The following is a report, of the proceedings of the Board after we went to press jesterday

On the Board resuming at 2 p.m. Mr Hall, in reply, said that he had come to the conclusion that there were only two positions which the Board could take up. One was to leave Mr Carruthers’s scheme in abeyance, and the other to resign. They could not carry out the scheme, because the ratepayers were opposed to it. So far as Mr Jones’ remarks went as to the modification of Mr Carruthers’s scheme, lie did not think that could be done.

Mr Jones said he desired to explain that he intended to carry out a portion of the scheme, such as side channels and sewers where nocessary. Mr Hall said that if they attempted to carry out the scheme in a modified way, the suburban districts would hare to pay for drainage which rendered no benefit at all to them. He further contended that the suburbs only received an equivalent to their rates, the capital of which was expended on the city, instead of, as Mr Hobbs bad said, that they got a large amount of benefit from it. Their position was just the same as a man paying interest on £IOOO thinking that he had paid the principal. Mr Hobbs wished to explain that they would strike two rates, the general rate paid by all parts of the district while the special rate would be levied where the work was done.

Mr Hall said that lie thought that if the Riccarton Road Board, for instance, undertook the clearing of the drains in their district they could do it for their rates. But when the Drainage Board stepped in they found that the suburbs had to pay a portion of the loan. If the City members wished to beautify it, let them put their hands in their pockets and pay for it. He shoidd never have brought the resolution forward ho had done had the resolution ho seconded been carried at the private meeting recently held. That resolution was to the effect that the Drainage Board shoidd resign in a body, and go to the ratepayers for re-election, which would decide the whole matter. He regretted very much to hear it stated by the members of the Board that they would retain their seats in defiance ol the ratepayers. [“Ho, no.”] lie begged the gentlemen’s pardon. It had been stated. He hoped the Board would carry the resolution, or if not take the other alternative and resign. The Chairman said lie hardly knew whether he was right in expressing his opinion on the subject that he had not heard any member of the Board say that he would stick to his seat.

Mr Hall reiterated that the remark was made and by Mr Jones. Mr Jones desired to explain that the remark had been made in another room. He had been asked by Mr Hall what ho intended to do, and lie had replied that he intended to support Mr Oarrnthers’s plans, or at least a modification of the same being made. He further staled that only ill health would render it necessary for him to resign. Mr Hail could hardly confirm what had fallen from Mr Jones.

Mr Wright thought that Mr Hall was out of order in bringing the matter before the Board which had taken place previously. Mr Jones would then request the reporters to strike out all reference to this private matter.

After a little passage of arms between Mr Jones and Mr Hall, Tlic Chairman put the motion with the following result: —Aye : Mr Hall. Noes ; Messrs Hobbs, Duncan, Harman, Ross, Jones, and Wright. The Chairman then said—What was to he done with Mr Ollivier’s letter?

Mr Hall thought that it would be better to have the manifesto which had been drawn up before them.

Mr Ross would move—“ That the report he considered in committee.”

Mr Hall objected to these private meetings. It would be the proper thing to do to let the public know what were the intentions of the Board. He would move—“ That the manifesto be considered at the Board.” Mr Hobbs moved —“ That Mr Ollivier’s letter be replied to, to the effect that it is under consideration, and that a reply will be sent in due course.” Mr Ross seconded the motion.

Mr Hull protested against this course. It was simply playing with the ratepayers. Why did not the Board at once say that they intended to stick to Sir Carruthers’s plans-. That was really what Mr Hobbs’s motion meant. He for one objected strongly to this method of dealing with the ratepayers. Let them plainly know what the really intended to do, and not throw dust in their eyes in this way. Mr Wright objected to Mr Hall saying that Mr Carruthers’s scheme was to be upheld by the Board. The whole matter was under consideration.

Some further discussion ensued, and ulti mutely

Mr Hobbs moved —“That the consideration of Mr Ollivicr’s letter be deferred.” Mr Boss seconded this. Mr Hall objected to the motion going thus indefinitely. If this were carried, the matter might be dragged over for weeks. It Mr Hobbs would put in the words “for the present ” he would vote for it. The motion was then put and carried, with the addition of the words “ for the present.” tree's creek. A letter was read from Mr Thomas Forrest complaining of the obstruction of Free’s Creek, which had caused an overflow of water on to his property. He stated his intention of proceeding at law to prevent such an occurrence taking place again. He also gave the Board notice of his intention to stop up the creek. It was resolved to warn Mr Forrest against filling up the creek, as thereby he rendered himself liable to penalties for so doing. The letter was referred to the engineer to report upon. THE PUMPING STATION. A memorial was read from a number of residents in Smith’s road, protesting against the pumping station being erected on the proposed site in Smith’s road as detrimental to their health and property. They pointed out to the Board that a suitable site could be got some chains further up the road. Mr Duncan said as they had not decided whether they were going to proceed with the works or not, the reply would be that the petition would receive due consideration before the works were proceeded with. He would move a resolution to that effect. Mr Harman seconded the motion, which was agreed to. ACCOUNTS. Accounts to the amount of £754 6s 2d were passed, and ordered to bo paid. THE NEW RATE. Mr Hobbs moved —“ That a 5d rate bo struck on rateable property in the district.” Whether they remained in office or not, faith would have to be kept with the English creditor. He desired to take this opportunity of saying that a portion of this 5d rate was intended to cover the interest on the £IB,OOO paid to the City Council for the outfall drain, for which the city levies no rate. So that though levied by the Drainage Board, it seemed to him that only 2kl was fairly chargeable to the Drainage Board. Mr Boss seconded the motion, which was carried. THE DRAINAGE BOARD MANIFESTO. Mr Duncan moved —“ That the Board go into committee on this matter.” Mr Hall could not understand why Mr Duncan wished to shelve this matter. He protested against it being done. The motion for going into committee was carried. The manifesto was considered seriatim, and adopted as a whole. It was decided that the clerk advertise the same in the newspapers. The Board adjourned at half-past 4 p.m. until Monday next.