CITY COUNCIL.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2052, 21 September 1880, Page 3

CITY COUNCIL.

The City Council met at their chambers last evening at the usual hour. There were present His Worship the Mayor, Ors. Lambert, England, Thomson, Hulbert, Cuff, Taylor, Vincent, Bishop, King, Ayers, and Gapes. Before proceeding to the ordinary business, a special meeting was held to confirm a resolution re taking over a private street, to be called Bath street. Or. Vincent proposed that the resolution to take over Bath street be confirmed. The motion was seconded by Or. Thompson, and carried. The clerk then road the special order, which received the Mayor’s signature. This concluded the business of the special meeting. The minutes of the last ordinary meeting wore then read and confirmed. The Mayor announced that the credit at the Bank amounted to £1270 16s lid. The Town Clerk then read the usual statement of accounts, which showed—Receipts, €450 Is lOd ; drainage rate account, 1880, £sl 6* 8d; District Drainage Board, £179 13s 4d ; bills to be paid—general account, £216 15s lOd; District Drainage Board, £1159 9a Bd. In reply to a question from Cr. Oherrill, Or. Lambert said the question of dealing with a portion of Cambridge terrace previouly referred to at the Council had not yet coma under the consideration of the new works committee.

Or. Oherrill said he had asked the question in order to draw attention to the fact that it was necessary that something should he done. Or. Bishop, in reply to a question, said that the building by-law was still in tho hands of the solicitors, hut Mr Garrick had intimated that it was not deemed advisable to proceed further until it was decided whether the firm were to continue their office ns city solicitors. A letter was read re Mayor’s Court, intimating that Mr Kolleston wonld take an opportunity of conferring with the Mayor on the subject. Mr Burrows, of the Hoathoote district, wrote asking permission to impound cattle from the city. A resolution was passed stating that the Council had no objection to his impounding cattle if he thought fib to do so on his own authority. A letter from the Tramway Company was referred to tho tramway committee. A letter was read from Mr Kent, drawing attention to the state of Ohndley’s right-of-way. The Mayor explained that this matter was referred to in tho surveyor’s report. The report of the city surveyor was as follows :

I. By instructions of the works committee, I have prepared a plan and estimate for enlarging the tank in Victoria street to enable the water carts to be better supplied ; at the same time it ■will increase the supply for fire purposes, as the enlarged tank will contain 46,000 gallons, and tho present one contains only 25,000. The expense will bo about J 3170, and tho works committee recommend that it shonld be dona. 2. The works committee have ordered a dozen brooms for channel sweeping, to be made hero, in order it possible to give local industry tho benefit instead of importing. 3. The works committee gave instructions this morning to advertise for tenders for the swimming bath. 4. The well in Victoria street is progressing satisfactorily. It is now down 124 ft. 5. Cement has been advertised for to lay tho channels in Horatio street and Chndlcy’s lane, but tho tenders being informal were not accepted. 6. No step has yet beau taken to erect the lamp pedestal in Latimer square, as it is intended, if possible, to attach to it a water supply for drinking purposes, and a reply to an application to the club to bo allowcd to connect with their well is being waited for I applied to Mr Charles Clark and Dr. Barker’s trustees to know if they would give a small strip of land on Oxford terrace, nearly opposite tha_ municipal buildings, for the purpose of widening Oxford terrace and doing away with the dangerous corner where the lamp stands, and by the plan annexed hereto it will be seen that they consent to do so. It therefore only remains for the Council to agree to it. The expense of making the alteration will be about JSIS, and the works committee recommend that it should be done. The piece of road at the east end of Salisbury street, alongside the Cemetery, has been formed and shingled. A discussion arose on the first clause of the report, as to tho advisability of carrying out the work as suggested or waiting till a scheme

J could be devised to extend the supply over a wider area for the purpose of fire prevention. Cr. England suggested that the question should be for the present postponed. Or, Gapes supported the suggestion, and remarked that underground pipes of communication from one tank to another would be an improvement on the idea of enlarging any one tank. The Mayor remarked that a reservoir was much required at the North town belt, as a recent event had exemplified. In reply to Or. Hulbert, the surveyor said that the new well would only give out water for one minute longer than before. Or. Ayers remarked that the work had not answered the purpose expected of it. Or. King said the original object was to provide for watering the streets, without reference to fire prevention. It was ultimately resolved to allow the subject matter of clause 1 to stand over till the work now in hand was completed in Victoria street. The remainder of the clauses wore passed, and the report as a whole approved. The report of the city inspector was next dealt with. It referred to certain matters requiring attention, including Chudlcy’o lane, regarding which a letter was read at an earlier stage of the evening. Or. Lambert moved that the Town Clerk write the Board of Health requesting that they should take action in the matter of th o North belt.

This was seconded by Or. Taylor, and agreed to. In reference to the tramway matters.

Or. Bishop, as chairman of the committee, said that all the differences that had arisen between the Tramway Company and the cabmen seemed to have been due to a want o f perception or consideration of the respective rights of the persons concerned. The committee had taken legal opinion on the subject, and considered it of considerable value, as being calculated to settle a serious difficulty, whilst carefully guarding the rights of all parties. They had taken this action chiefly for their own guidance, and the legal opinion referred to was at the disposal of the Council if it was deemed acceptable. A discussion aroaej ont a motion by Cr, Hulbert that the opinion be accepted. Some members were inclined to consider the matter in committee, others objected to the" reception of the opinion presented by Or. Bishop, whilst it was also pointed out that a motion was on the order paper upon which depended the position of this Council in relation to its legal advisers.

The Mayor said he should feel considerable delicacy in accepting a legal opinion obtained as this bad been, especially at the present time, which he considered quite inopportune. Cr, Thomson thought the action taken by the committee was unfortunate, to say the least, as seeming to cast a reflection upon the legal advisers of the Council. He did not for a moment mean to say that such was the intention of the committee, but the question was, how would the public look at it. He suggested a postponement of the matter till later on.

Or. Bishop, on behalf of the committee, disclaimed any intention of placing the city solicitors in a false position ; on the contrary, it was with the idea of strengthening their hands, if possible, that they had acted. Or. Hulbert considered that Councillors had exhibited a good deal of false delicacy in the matter. After further discussion Or. Hulbert withdrew his motion that the legal opinion be accepted, intimating that he would re-intro-du«a the question. A resolution by Or. Ohorrill as to the form of business was carried. Or. Vincent moved—“ That it is undesirable that the legal advisers of this Council should also act as the legal advisers of any other Board or Company that is likely at any time to have disputes on points of law or otherwise with the Council, but that the solicitors now employed by the Council have the option of continuing in that capacity on these terms.” la moving the resolution he remarked that it was inconsistent with a due regard for the interests of the ratepayers that the Council should continue on the present terms with their solicitors. Or. Hulbert seconded the motion. Or. Cuff said that their solicitors were a firm of high repute in the city, and the Council could not expect any firm of position in the profession would consent to act for one body only. Or. England supported the motion. Cr. Thomson could not see how they were to expect any solicitors to bind themselves to the Council to the exclusion of anyone else. There were lawyers and lawyers, but he would point out that the object of the Council was to get the beat legal advice they could possibly obtain. It would, moreover, look very much like an attempt to get rid of their present solicitors by a side wind, for considerations other than were mentioned in the resolution. He had made some enquiries on this subject, knowing that the matter would como on for discussion, and he had found that Mr Garrick was solicitor for this Council, the Drainage Board, and the Bank of Hew Zealand, and Mr Cowlishaw acted for the Tramway Company. Each gentleman acted separately—as much so as if they were not partners. He sboud oppose the motion Cr. England questioned that each member of that firm could act separately—the firm were the advisers of the Council and other bodies. Cr. Taylor supported the motion. Ho felt that the Council had been placed in a humiliating position by the way in which their bylaw had been referred to in the court by a member of the firm of Garriek and Cowlishaw, when conducting the case for some cabmen. Cr. King said he should oppose the motion. Ho deprecated coercion. They had the promise of Messrs Garrick and Cowlishaw that they would when required give the Council the preference in any case of dispute with any body except the Drainage Board. Or. Oherrill failed to see that any cause had arisen at the present time to call for the action proposed to bo taken. At the same time he approved of the general principle of the resolution.

Or. Gapes expressed every confidence in Messrs Garrick and Cowlishaw. Or. Lambert could notseethat the proposed action was called for at present. Or Ayers felt disposed to vote against the resolution. He felt at the same time that the position of their solicitors with respect to the Drainage Board was the reverse of satisfactory. Or, Vincent said he could not see how one firm of lawyoro could act for two different parties, and it must be remembered that the Council might at any time come into collision with the Drainage Board. Ho asked leave to amend the resolution. The resolution, as amended, read thus : “ That it is undesirable that the legal advisers of this Council should also act as the legal advisers of the Tramway Company and tho Drainage Board, hut that the solicitors now employed by the Council have tho opportunity of continuing to act for the Council in that capacity on those terms.” A division was taken on Or. Vincent’s motion, resulting as follows : —For— Ore. Vincent, Hulbart, Taylor, England and Bishop; against—Ors. King, Thomson, Cuff, Cherrill, Gapes, Lambert and Ayers. Tho motion was therefore lost.

Or. Gapes moved for an enquiry as to why no action had been taken re the tramway passing through tho cabstand at the South town bolt.

Or. Bishop explained the vast amount of work which the committee had done, and referred Or. Gapes to the opinion of Messrs Garrick and Cowlishaw.

Or, Gapes explained that he wanted to know why no report had been made when the tram was first run through that stand. He pointed out that tho matter was being taken up by tho public. Or. Taylor said Or. Gapes appeared to be hitting at tho surveyor, which was quite unfair and should not be permitted. Or. Cull was of opinion that an opportunity should bo given of eliciting an explanation us to why no report had been sent in on tho matter, especially since the surveyor was reported to have remarked in the Court that his reports did not meet with much attention at tho hands of tho Council.

The surveyor explained that what ho said in Court as to his non-success with regard to reporting tramway matters, had reference to the tramway authorities and not to the Council. Tho idea that he should reflect in open Court on tho body that employed him was absurdity itself. Ha then brought to tho recollection of certain members that he had reported on the matter in question. The surveyor’s explanation was considered satisfactory. After some further discussion, Or. Gapes replied, and tho motion was then put and negatived. Or. Taylor moved — 11 That in future tho town clerk give one week's notice to ooun-

oillors at the time when the committees for the year are appointed.” It was pointed out that the resolution was not intended in any way to be a censure on the town clerk. Or. Hulbert should be sorry for it to be thought that all councillors were as ignorant as the resolution would suggest. Or. Cuff said the regulation would be inoperative in the case of new members. Other members of the Council expressed their intention of voting against the resolution. The mover having replied, the resolution was withdrawn. A vote of thanks was passed to Mr Ohas. Clark and Dr. Barker’s trustees for the gift of a piece of land for the purpose of widening Oxford terrace. After disposing of some routine business, applications for carriage licenses were considered and dealt with, and the Council adjourned.