TURUA WHARF.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 5095, 2 March 1927, Page 4

TURUA WHARF.

DAMAGE BY SWIMMERS.

BY-LAW TO BE ENFORCED.

There was some discussion at last Friday’s meeting o'f the Thames Harbour Board upon a report from the engineer, Mr E. F. Adams, concerning trouble at the Turua wharf. Tlie report read as follows : — “Adult swimmers at, Turua have been causing trouble by interfering with the Board’s property and dripping river water on the cargo there. I regret to have to recommend stopping such a pastime, but tlie larrikin element, among them is quite out of control. I therefore suggest a notice against swimming, which will eliminate the respectable element and enable the trouble-makers to be pro ecuted.”

The chairman, in referring to t,he matter, said that lie would be very sorry to take such action, as it would stop sport and recreation. Mr Edwards asked what the damage amounted to. If it were trifling then he would not support .the report. Mr Adams said that people had complained that cement and other goods had been damaged by water. Probably the damage had been considerable. Swimmers had rigged up diving boards on the ballast, and the hatchways, and damage could have been done that would involve the Board in an outlay of £l5O.

Mr Loughlin said he was reluctant to see swimming from the wharf stopped.

The chairman remarked that the Board’s by-laws prohibited swimming from wharves and the jurisdiction or the board should not be weakened bj continuing any such breaches. Mr Edwards said tlie by-laws were only for protection.

Mr Adams, continuing, said the wharfinger had been driven to the limit of his patience. 'People used the shed for dressing in, and he could not control the position. The removal of hatches and weights was serious.. The chairman suggested that the matter be dealt with in terms of the by-law and the engineer’s suggestion.

Mr Loughlin suggested the matter be le'ft ewer till next meeting .and the mention of it would act as a warning.

Mr Wagstaff supported the engineer

The chairman moved and Mr Wagstaff seconded, that the report be adopted.

Mr Loughlin proposed that a notice be erected that the board’s property was not to be destroyed, and if this was not acted upon within a montn, then swimming-would be prohibited.

Mr McCormick seconded the amendment.

Mr Hetherington regretted that they should have to 1 stop swimming, but, the board’s property must be protected. If it was possible to shut the shed from swimmers he would favour it but apparently this could not be done.

The motion was carried.—Thames Star.