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
Article image
Article image

BOROUGH COUNCIL.

The ordinary meeting of the Borough Council was held in the offices, Lowe Street, last night. Present—His Worship the Mayor (T. W. Porter) in the chair, and Crs. Townley, Lewis* Tutchen, Joyce, Brown, Hepburn, Tucker* and Smith. The minutes of the previous meeting were first read and confirmed. outgoing CORREBPONDBNCKi The following outgoing oorresDondende waS then read:—To Kennedy ana Bennett rd erection of chimney and mills. INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE. The Clerk then read the following incoming correspondence:— Property Tax Department, Wellington, Jan. 80, 1884. To the Town Clerk, Gisborne. In reply to your letter of the 25th ultimo, I beg to inform you that no Crown lands have been assessed in Gisborne. The supple* mentary roll of Native lands will* however, be forwarded to you very shortly.—Yours obediently, J; Sperry i Commissioner; The Secretary said this was in answer to an enquiry aa to whether the Government offices were to be assessed, The Chairman said the best plan would be to inform the Commissioner that the remissness had been remedied and the assessment made. Cr. Tutchen said there was roads all round the buildings ; they ought to pay rates, The Government had not been over kind to the place, and should be assessed; It was resolved to act as suggested by the Chairman. The following letter re grant for bridge was tnen read:— Public Works Office, Wellington, Jan. 21,1884, Sir, —With reference to the application fot £1,500 for the main road works rdade by your Council under section 18 of the “ Roads and Bridges Construction Act, on or before the 80th June last, I am now directed by the Minister for Public Works to inform you that, the said application being entirely for bridges, it is approved in full, conditionally upon all the requirements of the said Act being complied with, Before any portion of vour grant can be issued it will be necessary for you to procure a certificate from the Government District Engineer in terms of section 9 of the Act of 1888, to the effect that your share of the proposed expenditure, to the extent of £5OO, has been already provided. I am specially to state that as amounts for bridges are expressly allocated for works of that class alone in terms of section 7 of the Act of 1888, the money granted for these structures cannot be diverted to any other purpose. I have, &c,,

0. J. O’Connor, mpler-sec. for P. Works. Cr. Townley asked how long before the vote would lapse, and was informed on the 81st of March, Cr. Tutchen moved “ That a committee be formed to meet the County Council, With a view of discussing the subject with them.” The County Council had previously promised to help in the construction of the bridge. The committee td consist of the Mayor ana Members Lewis, Smith, Tucker and Townley. The Chairman said he would move id amendment which would perhaps simplify matters. “ It is deemed expedient that the construction of the Gladstone Road Bridge, be proceeded with without any unnecessary delay* the Government having granted £1,500 in aid* and that the Cook County Council be requested to co-operate in the construction, which could be done by obtaining the sanction of Government to the £I,OOO grants for roads being diverted for bridges construction under the provisions of the Act; and that a Committee to carry out this object be appointed to meet the Committee of the County Council to-morrow night, the Committee to consist of His Worship the Mayor, and Crs. Lewis, Tucker, Tutchen, Townley, and Smith.” In the event of the County Council refusing to co-operate in the manner suggested, the Finance Committee to make the best arrangemei..s it could with a view of proceeding with the work at once. Cr. Lewis quite agreed with the Chairman, but as he thought Cr. Tutchen’s motion the best mode of procedure at present he would second it. He wished to see the result of the discussion with the County Council before proceeding further. Cr. Joyce thought the Natives should contribute towards the cost of the bridge, as it would tend to open up their lands. He thought they should be asked. Cr. Smith agreed with Cr. Lewis, and thought it best to see how the County Council were disposed towards the project. From what he gathered generally he was afraid they were quite lukewarm about the matter. The Chairman said no doubt the Natives would readily contribute towards the erection of the bridge. When it was explained that it will benefit them, he had no doubt they would agree to do so. Cr. Smith asked that Mr. Tutchen’s name be substituted for his, as he could not attend. Cr. Tutchen did not wish to meet the present County Council. Cr Kenny moved, “ That the Conference Committee be authorised to break gronnd when in conclave with the County Council.” Cr. Tucker did not agree with the manner in which the question had been brought forward. There was no immediate necessity for

the bridge. There was no necessity for this one like there was for the Taruheru Bridge. It looked like begging from the County Council. He would suggest that the motion be withdrawn, and that a letter be written to the County Council asking them to assist in the matter. Cr. Tutchen objected to the withdrawal of the motion. If the County would not assist themselves the Borough would cradle them and shame them with it. No doubt the Borough could do without them and could get the money with the assistance of the Natives. Cr. Tucker contended that it was more a County than a Borough work. Cr. Joyce agreed with Cr. Tucker, The bridge would be of no great benefit to the Borough. The Chairman entirely disagreed with Cr. Tucker that the bridge was of more import, ance to the County than to the Borough. The eunatruotion of the bridge was a great necessity in the event of harbot works, and was of vital importance to the Borough. The Borough should make every effort to construct a bridge. The County Council should be asked to co-operate and give all the assistance they could to the work. Would move the follow, ing amendment in the place of the former One, *♦ It is deemed expedient that the con> Btruction of the Gladstone Hoad Bridge be proceeded with without unnecessary delay, the Government having granted £1,500 in aid, and that the Cook County Council be requested to co-operate in the construction.” Cr. Kenny seconded the motion. Cr. Townley wished to know whether the Committee would not be more effective with the County Council than a letter. The position of affairs were quite different to what it was when the question was previously brought forward; He thought this was part of the harbor improvements. The matter would be better handled by the committee than by letter; Cr, Tutchen agreed with Cr. Townley, and thought the committee preferable to the letter. Cr. Tucker strongly objected to putting the matter in the shape of a motion. The committee could be instructed to feel the county pulse without any motion. The bridge was of no importance. Hoped that the chairman and Cr. Tutchen would withdraw their motions, Cr. Lewis pressed the original motion, and thought that the resolution would give the Committee more weight. The Chairman agreed with Cr. Lewis. He (the Chairman) withdrew his amendment In favor of the following amended motion by Mr. Tutchen :—" That the bridge across the Turanganui be constructed without any unnecessary delay." Cr. Smith moved aa an amendment—" That the conference committee be authorised to discuss the matter of constructing the Turanganui Bridge with the County Council." Cr. Tucker seconded the motion. It did not matter a snap whether the bridge was constructed or not. The Chairman said the Board should give an expression of opinion. He felt strongly on the point. Cr. Townley said the vital point was that if the matter was not soon settled the vote must lapse. On the amendment being put, it was carried; It was resolved, “ That the Committee confer with the County Council, and bring up their report to the Board at their next meeting.” PUBLIC wobxs committee’s report. The following report of the Public Works Committee was then read and passed I — The Public Works Committee report as follows:— Disraeli Street was inspected on January 80, and the Committee are satisfied with the manner in which this contract has been performed, and recommend the final payment to the contractor. Aberdeen Road,—The committee, together With the engineer, inspected this road to-day, and found the work had been satisfactorily performed by the contractor, Mr. McDevitt, and the work has been passed; Payment is also recommended of the £lB, leu £2, for repairs to Stanley Hoad, the £3 being for fascines supplied by the Council. J. Townley, Chairman, The following report was then read :—

engineer's retort. To His Worship the Mayor of Gisborne. Sir,—l beg to report as follows: — afpproochu to Taruheru Bridge,— The cost of making good the approaches on both sides would be £lO. Grey etreet Drain.— The pipes have been taken up, and re-laid at a lower level and at a proper gradient, and a grating has been placed at the upper end. The cost has exceeded the estimate, and I did not expect to have to take up the whole length of pipes, but this turned out to be necessary owing to the manner in which they had been laid. Contract), DieraeU ftnct.— This road was finished on Jan, SO, and inspected by the Public Work. Committee on Jan. 80th, and approved by them. I, therefore, recommend that a final payment be made to the contractor. The Board will have to decide whether the penalty for overtime, £BB, or any part of it; is to bo remitted. The time expired originally on Nov. 22,1888, after which an extension of 80 days was granted to Dec. 22nd, 1883, The work wa. finished on Jan. 29th, 1884, 88 days alter time. Aberdeen Road.—Tide road was finished on Feb. 11, and inspected by the Public Works Committee on Eeb. 12, (to-day) when they approved of the work. I therefore recommend a final payment. The contractors time, including an extension of 80 days, was up on Jan. 1,1884. He is therefore liable to a penalty of £4l for 41 days overtime. The Board will have to decide whether the penalty, or any part of it, is to be remitted. Stanley Road. — The work which Mr. McDevitt undertook to do on this road for £lB has been done, and has been approved of to-day by the Public Works Committee, I therefore recommend a payment of the net amount due to the contractor, (£14.) Day Labor.— To the amount of £l4 2s 9d, has been employed in altering Grey Street drain and doing other work. I have <Sc., B, J, Reynolds, Borough Engineer, DISRAELI STREET. Or. Tutchen moved, “ That Mr. Dolman get his balance in full." Cr. Kenny seconded the motion, which was carried. Stanley Road. Cr. Tutchen also moved, “ That the pay. nt be made.” Cr. Tucker would move as an amendment, it That the penalty be remitted.” Qy, Smith seconded the amendment, which was corned. C r Joyce thought it would have been better if °° ntract had not been touched. jhe remainder of the report was then adopted - Payments. Brigade; £4 Is; Brown and Smail, £IU- A G Croll, £1 9s; A. Eobb, £5 8s aa • J ’ Turton, £6 18s 3d; S. Doleman, £2 la.’. D Ready, £1 15s; J - B - Morgan, £2 18s 9d;" W. H. Clayton, £2 12s; McDavitt, £l4; s’. Dolman, £253 18s. PTTRIORDIXARY BUSINESS. Cr. Smith withdrew his motion re artesian wells. Cr. Tucker referred to the matter of the ferrying of school children over the river, but was informed that he was out of order on account of its being a Harbor Board question. Cr. Hepburn called attention to the bad state of Stanley Road. The Engineer’s attention was directed to the same. The Chairman wished to know what was going to be done with Read’s Quay. At present it was left in a very dangerous state. It should be levelled and formed. After some remarks from Cr. Tutchen, the Engineer was asked to bring up an estimate of probable cost, and lay the same before next Board meeting. Cr. Joyce asked the date on which the Borough Solicitor’s engagement expired, and was informed that it was on March 31st. The meeting then adjourned. After an interval of ten minutes a special meeting of the Harbor Board was held, but, owing to pressure on our space, we are compelled to hold the same over.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBS18840213.2.15

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 65, 13 February 1884, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
2,118

BOROUGH COUNCIL. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 65, 13 February 1884, Page 2

BOROUGH COUNCIL. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 65, 13 February 1884, 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