GISBORNE HARBOR BOARD.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 172, 2 July 1884, Page 2

GISBORNE HARBOR BOARD.

CENSURABLE CONDUCT OF THE ENGINEER. At the conclusion of the Borough Council a special meeting of the above was held for the purpose of receiving the valuations which had been made of Common and Shelton’s premises, and also to appoint a day for putting the same up to auction. On the Secretary handing a letter (which had been put in by the Board’s Engineer) to the Chairman, he called the latter’s attention to the words “Fees, £32,” which were written across the envelope. The Chairman said he did not (jaite understand, and wished to ask the Engineer for an explanation ; but it was found, after the Board had been kept waiting some time until search had been made, that Mr. Reynolds had made himself conspicuous by his absence, and had gone away as soon as he had handed in the mysterious letter. After some strong remarks had been made, Mr. Tutchen moved and Mr. Joyce seconded. “ That the packet be not opened until this day week.” Mr. Townley supposed that both sides would have to pay their own expenses of valuation, and he did not think that opening the letter would make any difference to their liability. Mr. Joyce would like to know what this large amount of money was for. Mr. Smith said that Mr. Shelton had informed him that they had paid their own valuator, but they would not think of paying an umpire. Mr. Townley said that after such a statement, it was plain that the charge of £32 was made by the Board’s Engineer. The Chairman thought that if such was the case, it was a most exorbitant charge. The Engineer had behaved disgracefully in this matter, and had no business to leave while the Board was sitting. Mr. Joyce thought the greatest contempt had been shown by the Engineer to the Board, and the sooner they got another engineer the better.

Mr. Tutchen strongly condemned the Engineer’s conduct. It appeared to him that the Engineer was trying to take every possible advantage of the Board. Such a sum was mos'x excessive, and it was high time to check this sort of thing, Ml Joyce said that according to the terms of agreement the Engineer had a right to do all the work of the Board such as the present, aud for which he was paid by salary. The Chairman said the Board must decide whether they would open the letter, and thus render themselves liable for this amount.

Mr. Townley took it that as the work had been done they would have to pay, whether they opened the letter or not. They would have to fight the matter out. Mr. Lewis supposed that the Engineer had taken advice and was acting accordingly. He would move “ That the letter be not accepted.” Mr. Moore seconded this proposition. The Chairman said that the Engineer had not acted at all right in this matter, and had shown the greatest contempt to the Board by leaving the meeting. Mr. Tutchen proposed and Mr. Joyce seconded “ That a vote of censure be passed against the Engineer for his disgraceful treatment of the Board.” The Chairman remarked that there was no information whatever given to the Board as to where the letter came from, or anything about it. It looked very bad indeed. Mr. Nolan, in answer to a question, said, if the Board opened the letter they would thereby render themselves liable for the amount of the fees marked thereon. If the other side had opened it they would have to Mr. Joyce stigmatised the Engineer’s conduct as “ sharp practice.” When a public servant behaved in such a manner, it was high time to put some check upon him. He would move “ That the original motion re valuator be rescinded, and that another valuator be appointed in his stead.” Mr. Nolan here explained that he had been appointed umpire by the valuator. The Chairman said that the Board had been badly treated in this matter, and he would suggest that the subject stand over until next week, when more information could be obtained.

Mr. Smith thought this about the boldest case of “ stand and deliver ” which he had ever seen. The Board’s servant had put a great insult upon them by his action in this matter. He agreed that the Board should certainly not open the letter. He had always defended the Engineer, but he must confess that the present action was too bad, and they should strongly resent it. The Chairman said it was a direct insult to the Board, and the whole proceeding was most irregular and discourteous. Mr. Nolan explained that if any one had asked his legal advice upon the point so as to secure the fees, he should have directed them to act in the manner the engineer had done. No matter which side opened the letter, they would be responsible for tho payment of the fees. He had unopened awards lying in his office for years, and no one would open them because of the fees marked thereon. The following motion was then put flnd carried “ That the opening of the valuation of Messrs. Common and Co’s, premises be deferred until this day week, and that the Chairman of the Board interview the Engineer in the meantime, and ascertain the meaning of the superscription on the envelope containing the award.” After several members had expressed their regret that the present was a special meeting, which precluded their bringing forward any other motion. The meeting then adjourned.