FOXTON LOCAL BOARD.

Manawatu Herald, Volume III, Issue 75, 20 May 1881, Page 2

FOXTON LOCAL BOARD.

♦ Tuesday, May 17, 1881. The Bjard met at 7.30 p.m. Present— Messrs Purcell, Ooley, Jonsoa, au.l Reeve. As the Chairman was not present Mr Parcell was voted to the chair. The Chairman exp ained that the meeting waa simply called to open the tender*. The following tenders were received for the erection of the Ball T<>wer : Aldrid 'c and Pat«rson, £11 10s Od; W. Nicholson, £7- The members agreed th it the latter was a fnir price, and Nicholson's tender waa accepted. For removing the sandhill on the Avenue the following tenders were received j — VV H. Reeve, 496 10s Od ; J Henderson. £93 17s Gd ; C. H Sym-ms, £90. A long and rather heated discussion took place as to which tender should be accep ted. Mr Reeve strongly maintained tha aa W. Reeve's tender was the liwes* on thprevious occasion, the B >ard were in duty bound to give the work to urn now, as th difference was not great Mr Coley supported this view also. The acting Chairman to>k the ouposit" view of the case, and urged that the B >ar I were there to disl>urse public money, and dividual, and give the work to the person who would do it the cheapest. In this case, he said he considered that each of the tenderers were as good as the other, And M" Symons wonld certainly perform the work m well SB Mr Roeve, and by giving th.work to him the Board would savt £6 10* Mr Reeve here agtin reiterated his former opinion that if the contract were not given to hi» son 8 great Injustice would be done. Mr Purcell remarked that it was very had taste for Mr Reeve to speak in the matter at all, considering it was well known that his hones were worked by W. Reeve. He also stated that if the Board accepted the highest tender in this instance, the public in future would not tender again for work, as they would say " It is no use tendering; Reeve will get it." Mr E iston, the Chairman, here arrive!, and sat down, bnt • i i<l not tike fcho chair. Mr Jonswi said the nvtfter was a ticklish one to <l»<il with. On the one han.l, he believed Reove, l>einjr the lowest tenderer last time should net the cn;«tr.»ct--. hut. on the other baud, hy accepting Synons' tender the work would be. done for £6 10< c icaper, <vhich meant a consider il»lo saving. He thought he xhould vote for the lowb*; tenderer receiving the contract. Mr Eiston said that if the previous tenders had not been opened, he should most decidedly vote in favor of Symons' tender 'Ming accepted, but as the teuders had been opened aud intending contractors had benn enabled to hear oioh other's prices, he thought Reeve, being the lowest ten-

derer on that occasion, should get tho contract. However, he did not intend to vote one way or the other. Mr Reeve remarked that by havin < called fresh tenders they bad saved about £16, and that was an additional reason why the Board could afford to give the contract to Reeve. Mr Purcell said that showed that the 6 >ard had done wisely in calling for fresh tenders, and because they had saved this money they were not called upon to throw £6 of it away. He also remarked that th<Btiard had workwd amicably together up to the present time, bu 1 ; he thought if thej o >uld not agrou hotter than they had don? on that occasion they had better resign an>i ■jive place to men who could. Mr Reeve then proposed that W. Reeve'B tender be accepted for the Avenue contract, which was seconded Mr Coley. Mr Easton Raid he would not vote on the matter, and Mr Jouson also remarked tha he would not vote. However, on beiu^ pressed by the other members, Mr Jonsou aaid he thought Reeve should have th>job. The motion was then put and carried. Ayes— Messrs Reevo, Coley, and Jonsou. No— Vlr Purcell. This te minuted the business, and th meeting, which had been rather stormy throughout, closed.