Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ONE DEAD, UP POPS ANOTHER.

TO THE EDITOR

SIR, —I see from your last issue that " Hot Springs " is dead, but from his ; ashes sphinx-like, has arisen—" James McLeod." This gentleman - shows strange ignorance of the most elementaryprinciple of logical deduction. Howdoes he imagine my argument is affected by the precise figures used ? When I say Mr Allen, after spending a couple of thousand, would not be baulked simply by having to spend another £50 or so, my argument would not be affected at all if you substitute £200 or even £500 for the £50. Is even Mr McLeod so foolish as to imagine that after spending so large a sum on the grounds and the house, Mr Allen would let that lie idle rather than spend another £500 on drainage ? Besides, with the cocksureness of ignorance, Mr McLeod assumes that there is only one method of drainage that could be adopted by Mr Allen. Now, although I am not the drainage expert that Mr McLeod is, I could suggest to Mr Allen two perfectly feasible systems, neither of which would cost Mr Allen more than £50. I could also suggest a system thatf would cost double Mr McLeod's estimate, and would last almost forever. Again, Mr McLeod apparently tries to make your readers believe that a further supply of water could be got without doubt for £6. Surely he knows better than this. The Board in Mr McLeod's time paid Mr Simcock £6 for putting down a bore, but' then the Board supplied the piping. At present prices this would run for • each bore of average depth another £4, and then in addition, if water was found in the first bore, there would be a further cost of say £5 per hundred feet for coupling up the newly-formed bora to the system. Besides, even at the Springs grounds you do .not always find a satisfectory supply when you bore. At present there are no less than four bores in the grounds that produce either no flow or so small a one that they are not ! worth coupling up. Was I not justified in saying that to bore for fresh supplies of water would cost the Domain Board a considerable sum? Your correspondent then traverses my statement that there was a probability of the Board not obta'ning a further supply when they had speat what they could spare on boring. Now I have a distinct recollection of beini present at a deputation to

Minister of the Crown in the Terminus Hotel at Helensville, when Mr McLeod urged upon the Minister the advisability of taking over the property now owned by Mr Allen (together with adjoining lands), and in support of his argument stated that a bigger flow could be obtained from the springs under discusssion than from the Board's own bores ; and when the Minister enquired why the Board did not put down further bores to increase the supply, Mr McLeod stated that there was no certainty of getting a supply when putting down a bore, as the Board had already " found out to its cost." Now it appears Mr McLeod blames me for sharing his previous opinion. Re bore running to waste at the time the Board made terms with Mr Allen : Sometimes a bore which gives a good flow for a while ceases to flow, and so when a new bore is put down the Board always waits to see if it is permanent before incurring the expense of linking-up. The bore in question was found to be a good one, and was linked up some six months ago. But even now without Mr Allen's overflow the supply of water at the Springs is not sufficient to maintain the temperature of the swimming-bath. Any man with eyes }in his head can form his own opinion on this point by going into the bath a few times and see the average small flow from the Board's own pipe, and the large supply from Mr Allen's overflow. The highly charitable estimate of my motives contained in the latter part of the letter lam discussing, is well worthy of a gentleman who has the local reputation of never having been heard to say a good word for anyone ! But the last two sentences in the letter are based upon a conversation I had with Mr McLeod in November last, when I expressed surprise that previous Boards had^njjiver made any provision for supplybowling green with fresh water. |w|p^} >tlie present war began the Board IfJKiAeasily have made some provision j^^P^aris of tanks to catch the large coming from the extensive roofvarious buildings, and so to give an occasional watering non-mineral water. I was to hear this had never I am, etc., E. Thurlow Field.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/KWE19160518.2.11

Bibliographic details

Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 18 May 1916, Page 2

Word Count
792

ONE DEAD, UP POPS ANOTHER. Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 18 May 1916, Page 2

ONE DEAD, UP POPS ANOTHER. Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 18 May 1916, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert