BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 2361, 29 November 1921, Page 2

BOROUGH COUNCIL.

FORTNIGHTLY MEETING,

The ordinary fortnightly meeting of the Borough Council was. held in the Council Chamber last night.

WHYTE STREET EXTENSION. The Public Works Committee reported that the Committee having viewed the proposed Whyte Street Extension, decides that the matter of accepting dedication of the street be left to the Council.

The Mayor voted against the reeommendatiop, The Mayor moved, and Cr. Walker seconded that without prejudice, and with the object of reaching a settlement re Whyte Street Extension, Mr F.. S. Easton be informed that, subject to compliance with (he Council’s requirements re metalling of street, viz., an additional 11J yards of fine metal for binding crown, 17 c. yards of clay in lieu (hereof, the said material to be distributed evenly over the crown of. the street, the Council is willing to delete that portion dealing with kerbing and asphalting footpaths from its specifications, and to accept dedication of the street. The Mayor, in speaking to the motion, said that the matter had been going on for some 15 years. In 1906 the Council had laid down practically the same conditions, so the Council had been consistent in its requirements. In dealing with the subject, the Municipal Corporations Act and the Public Works Act are inconsistent. The- Municipal Corporations Act was very stringent in its requirements of a private street, while the Public Works Act lays down that footpaths have to be put in as may be agreed upon. Some people say that the Council is unreasonable in stipulating that footpaths have to be laid down in the present case. This is not so. The Council had waived the right of forcing water pipes to be laid, which matter the then council will have to provide at some future date. It is no use the Council supplying specifications if they are not going to be carried out. Re the culvert, it had been said at a previous meeting that the Council could have had both culvert and footpath if they had gone about the matter in the righ way. This statement was not quite correct. If the Council accepts (lie street, they have got to face the expenditure of about,£2so to make the street properly up-to-date. They would have to lay at least one footpath and waterpipes. He considered that the motion was an honest attempt to meet the situation. Re footpaths, if they- were going to take Mr Martin's opinion in one thing, they should take it on everything. When the Manawatu County Council laid down the Beach Road the Council specified that there should he IS yards to the chain. In this case they were asking 11 yards of metal only, and the rest broken brick. He had brought forward the motion with a view of settlement.

Cr. Walker said lie was quite in accordance with the motion. He considered Mr Easton would meet the Council in a reasonable way.

Cr.-Ross said that the point in his mind was whether Mr Easton bad complied with the specification. Had the Council evidence that he bad not ? Had he or ha„d he not put the specified quantity of metal on the road? The Mayor: “I have evidence that he has not!” Cr. Martin said that he had asked Mr Evans, the contractor, and he denied that there was not the right quantity there. The Mayor then read a. letter from Messrs Evans Bros, bearing on the point, which proved that there was a shortage. Cr.. Martin said that he was absolutely opposed to the motion. The Mayor had said that the road had been hung up for 15 years. Why? He said that they all knew why it had been bung up lately, and that although the Mayor had said that there was a shortage he could not definitely prove it. The contractor had said that the metal had been put on in accordance with the specifications. lie had made the whole matter clear to Mr Evans when he had asked him, so there was no mistake. The Council was trying to smother the matter when they knew that they had to take the street over. The Public Works Committee had inspected the road, and had made no report. . Why was that? The Council knows that the street is not really up-to-date, but they also know that Cook Street, Whittaker Street, and Hillary Street are not, and never were, up-to-date, yet they had been taken over. It seemed to him that an attempt was made to cloud the issue. They were putting the ratepayers to more expense. To-niglvt was the night to settle the matter, and he would move an amendment,

Cr. Thompson said that he did not think that it was correct to say that the matter had been hung up for 15 years. He knew that it had not been bung up the'Tast two years, with the exception of the last fortnight, when the matter had come up. Cr. Smith said that seeing he had moved that the Public Works Committee report om the matter at the last meeting, he must express his dissatisfaction at the absence of a report, and.the decision of the Committee. The matter could have been settled at the last meeting of the Council had they known the Public Works Committee were frightened to give a report on the road. With the absence of the report he was not sure which way to vote. If the Committee had said take over the road, he would have been- quite satisfied to vote that way.

Cr. Thompson, in explanation of the Committee’s decision, said that

the whole thing rested on a legal point. He did not call it a street at all, and he had had some experience in’ that connection. The evidence before them was very conflicting. That is what had made him move that, the matter be referred back to the Council.

Ai£ amendment was proposed by Cr. Ross, and seconded by Cr. Whibley, that the extension of Whyte Street be taken over* by the Council from Mr F. S. Easton, and that all necessary deeds lie executed

as soon as possible. Cr. Whibley said that as seconder of the amendment lie wished to say something on the matter. The Mayor said that the amendment was out of order, and that Cr. Whibley could not speak. Cr. Whibley said that he would

speak., _ The Mayor said flint- he could only speak (o the motion. Cr. Whibley said that the Council were only quibbling over the matter. They could not force Mr Easton to put down footpaths. He said that the Mayor had had a letter in his pocket to that effect when he had come to the last meeting of the • Council and said that they could. Evidently he was taking the Palmerston Town Clerk’s opinion against Mr Martin, the Municipal Association’s Solicitor’s. He said that there was nothing to force Mr Easton to put more clay .on the road. He was opposed to putting 'the ratepayers to the expense of lighting Mr Easton on the matter. At the most they could only gain 11A yards of metal. It was personal feeling throughout that was against it. Cr. Walker said that lie objected to that statement. Cr. Whibley said that Cr. Walker had said that Mr Easton was rcasmable if met in a reasonable way, vet he had voted against the chance if meeting him reasonably. If they forced Mr Easton to go to court over a paltry lli yards of metal he would be absolutely opposed to it. He would also like his name recorded as being opposed to the Mayan ruling Cr. Ross’ amendment out of order. The Mayor, said that the motion would have to be rescinded before the amendment could be made. Cr. Whibley said that if the amendment was out of order, then he held that the motion was also. He hoped the Mayor would take the responsibility for this. Cr. Martin moved, seconded by Cr. Rand, also an amendment that the Council take over the road recently formed by Mr Easton through his property, under the Public Works Act. The Mayor said that it was the as the motion. The amendment was also ruled out. The Mayor said that he would like to ask Mr Bergin his opinion on the motion. Mr Bergin said that owing to his dual capacity he would not like to do anything in the matter. He asked if it would give a definite answer to the application. The Mayor said that it would. Mr Bergjn: “Will it say whether the Council will take over the road or not? The Mayor: “Yes!” Mr Bergin said that he would like to see a definite motion. He wanted to know the decision, “yes” or “no.” Cr. Bryant said that there was nothing to say how much metal had been put on the road. The Council should not hang The matter up any longer. They should decide yes or no. He said that he was quite willing to let the matter go before a judge, as the Acts were complicated. Mr Bergin pointed out that the Acts did not override each other, but were quite different. There were two distinct things about them. The judge, as the Acts were conflicting, on one Act.

Cr. Bryant suggested an alteration to the motion.

The Mayor said lie was quite agreeable to add to it Cr Martin’s suggestion, “In accordance with the Public Works Act.”

Cr. Whibley said that he objected in the motion being altered. Cr. Martin said that be couldn’t sec bow the Mayor could rule his amendment out. He asked why he did not rule it out previously. This was not consistent.

The Mayor said that he hoped the motion would be passed. The motion was then put, and was carried on the casting vote of the Mayor, Councillors .Whibley, Martin, Rand and Ross voting against it. •