Borough Council.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume X, Issue 1031, 2 February 1882, Page 2

Borough Council.

Present: His Worship the Mayor, Crs. Townley, Clayton, Lewis, Berry, Tutehen, Whinray, Brown and Tucker. Correspondence. A letter was read from Mrs Daley applying for a refund of £2 13s for legal costs paid to Mr Brassey in connection with the recent Borough loan. A lengthy discussion ensued.

Cr. Townley explained that when the commissioners were appointed Mr Brassey was instructed to search the titles of the proposed securities. Cr. Townley proposed, and Cr. Lewis seconded, that the refund should be allowed to Mrs. Daley. Cr. Tucker said that the commissioners should only take those securities that appeared on the face of them to be right. If, in the majority of instances, the councillors were able to attend to their own private transactions without incurring heavy legal expenses, such as charged by Mr Brassey, they (the Crs.) should be able to do the same for the Borough. Cr. Tucker then proceeded to criticise minutely each item charged by Mr Brassey (the total amount was £4 9s paid by Sirs Daley, who claimed the refund of £2 13s), and after occupying the time of the Council for about twenty minutes, terminated his address by announcing that he would support the motion. Cr. Berry essayed to make a remark upon the unprofitableness of the discussion, but was ruled out of order by His Worship. The motion for the refund being made as proposed, was then put and carried. N. Z. International Exhibition. A circular from the International Exhibition Committee, Christchurch, asking that specimens of local produce or manufacture, be forwarded to the Exhibition to take place in Christchurch in April next, was read and received.

Cr Berry suggested that exhibits of mottled kauri and paraffin should be sent. Cr. Townley was in favor of the question being taken up generally by by the whole district. It would be well if the committee appointed to carry out the arrangements for the Melbourne Exhibition were to move in the matter. They possessed a fund of information already at hand that could be available upon the present occasion. Cr. Tutehen believed the question was well worthy of the attention of councillors. There were many exhibits that this district could forward, such as wheat, oats, barley, maize, and furniture. Crs. Townley and Whinray could send specimens of locally made articles of furniture. Specimens of timber could be also forwarded. There were many things besides which the committee could do. There were some excellent samples of wheat grown in the district this year ; the barley and oats were also very good, and the maize was better than any he had seen for years. A Councillor suggested that some of the Kaiti metal might form a valuable geological exhibit. Cr. Whinray was of opinion that His Worship should have a notice inserted in the papers convening a public meeting to take the subject into consideration. Cr, Berry said as the Exhibition was a colonial one many important exhibits could be sent from this district which could not be elsewhere obtained.

After some further discussion, it was decided that His Worship the Mayor be requested to confer with the Chairman of the Cook County Council as to the advisability of calling a public meeting upon the subject. A Porcine Bequest. A letter was read from Mr W. Williams asking permission of the Council to keep a pig on a vacant piece of laud “ isolated from anywhere.” The Inspector of Nuisances having informed the Council that the place referred to was, as the letter indicated, “ isolated from anywhere,” permission was granted. A letter from Messrs Stevenson, Parnell and Boylan, Adair, and other ratepayers of Lowe-street, asking that an obstruction near the Masonic Stables, should be removed, was read. Cr. Tutehen moved that the request be complied with. Cr. Tucker seconded the motion, and after having spoken at considerable length then informed His Worship and Councillors that he would withdraw from seconding. The motion appeared in jeopardy for want of a seconder, when Cr. Lewis came to the rescue and the motion was carried. Oxenham’s Contract. A letter was received from Mr Oxenham to the following effect: — Gisborne, 30th January, 1832. The Mayor anti Borough Councillors, Gisborne Borough. Gentlemen, — Tlte dispute between the County Council and myself about spreading gravel having been settled, I am now prepared to go to Ormond for gravel, in terms of the fresh specifications drawn out by you and as slightly amended. If the specifications and bond are prepared, I will sign as convenient. I name as my sureties Messrs. A. Graham and E. Camerom. —Yours, Ac. 8. Oxenham. The amended specifications were referred to, and discussion ensued upon the application that the words in the contract guarding the Council against any responsibility be amended so as to excise the words “and from any other cause whatsoever.” Cr. Tutehen objected to the words being erased from the specifications. His Worship: Suppose the contractor were to be sued for running his trucks on the rails ? Cr. Tutehen explained that the arrangement with the contractor was simply to supply the Borough with gravel. It was quite immaterial how he went about it; whether the contractor brought it in a bullock dray or on his back, so long as it was got.

Cr. Tucker was under the impression that the contractor should indemnify the Council from any action at law through accidents that might occur. Cr. Berry did not see what right the Council had to depart from the terms of the specifications. Cr. Somervell wanted to stick to the original contract. His Worship said as far as lie remembered the only difference between the specification before the Council and the terms of the original contract was, in the latter the contractor was responsible for damage, while in the present contract the contractor’s sureties as well as the contractor himself were responsible. Cr. Townley was going on to show that there was a great deal in the present terms that there were not in the other, when His Worship ruled him out of order. The discussion must he confined to the motion before the Council. Would they accept the contract subject to the emendations proposed ? Cr. Townley said what had to be considered was whether, byerasing the words “ or from any other cause whatsoever during the currency of the contractwere those words so material to the specifications as to prohibit their excision. It was imperative that at all hazards some efforts should be made for procuring metal for the roads. Cr. Tucker said he did not differ very much from the Council, if the words objected to were struck out, and that words to the following effect, be inserted in lieu thereof:—That after the word “ negligence ” be inserted the words that the contractor and his sureties will be held responsible for any damage, disregard of, or noncompliance with any conditions of contract herein or hereafter to be attached.

Motion made accordingly and carried. Crossings. Mr Oxenham objected to that part of the specifications providing that he should place crossings wherever ordered to do so by the County Engineer. There was no objection to putting crossings where required in the Borough. Cr. Somervell said it was unfair for the contractor to be compelled to put crossings wherever the County Engineer might direct. Every private individual living along the line between Makaraka and Waerenga a-hika might want a crossing opposite to where he lived. About 32 crossings would be required, and it would merely rest with the County Engineer whether or not they should be put up. The Borough Engineer explained that that proviso was inserted at the County Engineer’s request. Cr. Clayton observed that the point in dispute in no way at all affected the Borough. It was a matter to be settled between the County Council and the contractor. Cr. Whinray stated that under the Tramways Act the contractor was bound to make crossings wherever required. The contractor took the contract with his eyes open. The time had pretty well elapsed now when the contract should be finished. The Borough Council had no business to interfere in the matter. It remained with the contractor and the County Council. It was resolved to refer the matter to the County Council. This having concluded the discussion with regard to the alterations, Cr. Tucker proposed, Cr. Berry seconded, and it was carried unanimously, “ That subject to the insertion of the words agreed on after the word “negligence” and to the decision of the County Council as to crossings opposite to private holdings, His Worship be empowered to accept the new contract, receive the new bonds, and cancel the existing contract.”

Driving Houses. Cr. Clayton presented a petition from a number of residents in and around Childers-street inviting the attention of Councillors to the serious evil of driving horses at a furious rate through the streets. The petition was signed by thirteen ratepayers. On the motion of Cr. Clayton, seconded by Cr. Tutehen, the petition was received. Kaiti Contract. With reference to this contract, Cr. Tucker proposed that the contractor’s sureties be notified of the final clause in the terms of the contract. Agreed to. The Punt. A letter was received from the contractor asking for extension of time. The time expired on the 12th Janusry. The Mayor pointed out that a fortnight ago the Council refused to grant a similar request. In reply to Cr. Berry, the Engineer stated that the punt was almost completed. Cr. Tucker opposed the extension of time being granted. Application refused. Notice of Motion. Cr. Whinray gave notice of motion that at the next sitting of the Council he would move that in the interests of the ratepayers of the Borough it was desirable that the Council should purchase an artesian well-sinker with the view of securing a water supply for Borough. Unoccupied Sections. Cr. Tutehen brought under the notice of the Council that tho condition in which the unoccupied sections near

Stanley Road, overgrown with scrub, was such as to entail danger from fire to the buildings of persons residing in the vicinity. Cr. Tutehen had a letter from Mr Tattley drawing the Council’s attention to the matter. It was agreed that steps be taken to remove the nuisance complained of, and that the owners of the unoccupied sections be communicated with. Common’s Wharf.

Cr. Townley asked whether the Wharf Committee appointed to report upon the question at issue, had brought up their report yet ? His Worship stated he did not think it wise to state the reasons why they had not furnished their report. At present it was not considered advisable to make their report known. Cr. Townley said that the Council had been urging this matter on the Government for some time. The question should be settled. The public had a right to know what was going on. Cr. Somervell said the Council were in a great hurry to get this matter settled by the Government, and now the matter ought to be finally disposed of. Tho Council had gone to some trouble in urging upon the Government the necessity of a settlement of the claim. The matter then dropped. Derby Street. Cr. Townley enquired if the north side of Derby-street was to be shingled ? It was not included in the present shinglintr contract. Cr. Whinray thought it very desirable that the place named should be shingled. Water Supply. Cr. Somervell here (11 p.m.) remarked that every time he sat at the Council table he had been parched with thirst. He would therefore move that there be two bottles of water, and glasses for each Councillor. Cr. Clayton suggested that the glasses should be attached to the bottles. This motion gave rise to suggestions of introducing a liquid of a more fortifyin character than aqua pura. Cr. Clayton thought a filter would be a good idea. That would be better than water bottles. His Worship instructed the Town Clerk to have a small filter and the requisite glasses procured. Borough Solicitor. Cr. Townley obtained leave to adjourn his motion for the appointment of a Borough Solicitor until next sitting. Lighting the Streets.

Cr. Lewis’s motion came on for discussion. In moving the motion standing in his name he trusted that it would receive favorable consideration at the hands of Councillors. The town and suburbs were in much need of being lighted in the dark nights, lie had given the question as much attention as possible, and had come prepared with figures, from which it would be seen that the Council could favorably entertain the scheme he had to propose. A suitable lamp could be obtained for £3. He had not yet been able to ascertain what wuld be the cost of iron posts. Wooden lamp-posts with iron fittings for lamps would cost 355. Twelve lamps would be required. It would be a matter for the Council hereafter to determine where those lamps would go. Including maintenance, labor, and general cost, the sum of £4 15s. would be necessary for each lamp. The cost of the iron posts would be a little more. If iron posts were used they would be suitable in time to come, when the town would be supplied with gas. The cost of lamps and posts he estimated at £57. He had calculated the cost of maintenance. One lamp would use twothirds of a pint of oil in twelve hours. The lamp would not be required to be lighted for a longer period than that each evening. The lamps would be required 20 nights out of each month. The lighting and cleaning of each lamp would be about ss. a week each, or £3 a month. He would therefore urge upon the Council the necessity of placing a sum of £6O for the object. The style of lamp he had seen was calculated to cost £6 landed in Auckland, and would consume so little oil that it was considered more economical by 65 per cent, than gas at 4s a thousand feet. He would, therefore, propose that 12 lamps be put up within the Borough at sites hereafter to be fixed.

Cr. Clayton seconded Cr. Lewis's motion. Cr. Somervell rose. He said he had a lot to say on t he subject, and he then proceeded to say it. He opposed the motion ; but he was not altogether opposed to lamps. He thought, however, that the roads should be "ptit into such a position that people could walk along them in the daylight first. The speaker then went on to point-out the bad state of the streets off Gladstone Road. Until they were properly formed the question of lamplighting should not be entertained. He had no objection to lighting, provided the streets he referred to received a fair proportion of illumination on dark nights. His Worship: Where does Cr.' Lewis propose to place the lamp-posts? Cr. Lewis named the corner of Childers-street, one at the Ferry corner near the Government Buildings, Bright-street, Grey-street, Carnarvon street, Disraeli-street, Roebuck Road, and other places specified. The lamps could be placed at the corner of the alternate cross streets along Gladsono Road.

Cr. Tutehen said the subject was a most important one. He once lived himself in a town that had lamps, and found out that a few lamps in the main streets with none in the bystreets Was a disadvantage than otherwise. The Borough required money for the roads first. Cr. Townley quite agreed with the remarks that had fallen from the last speaker. A small part lighted would be worse than if the streets were not lighted at all. If the twelve lamps were spread all over the Borough the ratepayers might be just as well without them. The financial condition of the Borough would not permit it to incur the liability proposed without striking a special rate. The cost of lighting the streets should not be taken from the ordinary revenue. If it were proposed to take it from that source he would vote against the motioh. Cr. Whinray said that in lighting the Borough they had to start somewhere. It was no use beginning in the direction of Cr. Tucker’s place where there was not much traffic. The places most used out to be lighted up first. His Worship said that nearly the whole of the loan had been spent in Gladstone Road. Something ought to be done where the outside ratepayers lived. Cr. Tutehen : I live on Gladstone Road. I fought against the tree planting, and I shall fight against the lamps. Cr. Whinray : With regard to the £lO,OOO loan that was spent on the main street, the Council would be making a laughing stock of itself if it neglected the main street, and started to light the back streets instead. Cr. Tucker thought the Council should confine itself to whether or not the lamps were to be got. The fewer put on Gladstone Road the better. Lights were not required in well formed streets. He would be in favor of half-a-dozen of lamps being got, but not for Gladstone Road. Cr. Lewis replied fully and at length. With regard to the financial aspect of the question, the funds of the Borough must be in a bad way, if a sum of £7O could not be set aside for a work like this. Cr. Tucker: If you make it half-a-dozen of lamps I’ll vote for the motion. Cr. Lewis somewhat reluctantly consented to amend his motion so as to specify six lamps instead of twelve. Cr. Wbinray: I think it would be a farce to try six lamps. His Worship the Mayor: And so do I. Cr. Clayton: If there are a halfdozen of lamps, let them be put in tho longtitudinal streets, and I do not think that any of the inhabitants would have any cause of complaint. Cr. Lewis : The council seem to bo discussing the position of the lamps. Leave that for the future. Motion as amended was then put and carried that a half-a-dozen of lamps be provided for the Borough.