BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume I, Issue 243, 24 September 1884, Page 2

BOROUGH COUNCIL.

At the ordinary meeting last evening there were present—His Worship the Mayor (in the Chair), Crs. Lewis, Wilson, Townley, Joyce, Hepburn, Graham. The minutes of last meeting were read and confirmed. Correspondence. Correspondence comprised a circular from Mr. Wilfred Bodger.—Received. Circular from Property Tax Commissoner.—Received. Letter from New Zealand Loan and Mercantile Agency Co. for permission to make a sewer from their new premises.—Granted. From the same calling attention to the state of Read’s Quay at the rear of the Company’s new premises.—Referred to the Engineer to report upon. From D. Malone re being over time in completing Childers Road contract, and asking that the penalty be not enforced.—Granted. From M. Davis, asking the Council to take over the weighbridge.— Granted from the time the contractor for the bridge requires the site. From R. Douglas & Co., to the effect that the difficulty of getting shingle necessitated an extension of time for the Palmerston Road contract.— Granted. From T. Gregson asking permission to remove a sledge hut.—Granted. From A. Ledger, asking the Council to take into consideration the conduct of the Town Clerk in summonsing him for hawking fish without a license. A long discussion took place on this matter. Mr. Graham asked if the Clerk knew of any cases where persons were hawking without licenses who had previously held them. The Clerk said he knew of none. Cr. Joyce thought the clause only applied to persons who followed hawking as a trade, and not to those who only caught a few fish and offered them for sale. He considered, however, the Clerk had done his duty. His Worship said the bye-law did not define what a hawker was.

Cr. Lewis did not see any justice in Cr. Joyce’s argument. If it was not the man’s trade so much the greater his offence in interfering with the legitimate trader. He was in favor of the bye-law being suspended in the case of fresh fish, as it was a perishable article.

Cr. Wilson thought the bye-law should be withdrawn as regarded fresh fish.

Cr. Graham said it was like making fish of one and flesh of another. If they exempted fish why should they tax vegetables? They should revise the whose bye-law, and define what they meant by a hawker.

Cr. Townley ui derstood the matter had been settled in the Magistrate’s Court. The bye-law clearly defined what a hawker was—viz., a person taking a shop for less than three months or offering goods from door to door. The bye-laws had been fully considered before they were passed. A breach of the bye-law was made by Ledger, and he considered a penalty ought to have been inflicted. It was nonsense to talk about repealing a bye-law every time any one considered themselves aggrieved. The Clerk had done his duty in enforcing the bye-law.

His Worship was of opinion that breaches of the bye-law were going on every day. It would be a foolish thing to put restrictive laws on persons who only disposed of small things such as fish, eggs, <£c. Cr. Lewis said the vendors of such goods as eggs and butter could dispose of their goods through the stores. Therefore they should be made to pay a license, as otherwise they were in a position to undersell the shopkeepers, who had great expenses in the shape of insurance, rates, taxes, drc. As it was now people came into town .with butter and eggs and similar commodities, hawked them about from door to door, and then offered the refuse to the shopkeepers. Cr. Wilson considered Ledger's complaint very ill-founded. On the day the clerk summoned Ledger he had himself seen him threaten another person for trading without a license He knew that the clerk had done his duty in every case that had come under his notice. Cr. Graham was of opinion that Ledger had been made an exception of He did not think Ledger had any right to hawk the fish without a license, but others were doing the same thing. His Worship did not think there were any two opinions about the bye-law having been broken, but there were extenuating circumstances. Cr. Townley moved that the letter be received and the clerk be instructed to see the bye-law enforced in every instance. Cr. Graham seconded. Carried. A letter from the Cook County Council re the Turanganui bridge was next read, and provoked a good deal of discussion. Public Works Report. Re Childers Road. The Public Works Committee reported having inspected the contract executed by Mr. D. Malone, and were thoroughly satisfied with the manner in which the work had been done. Engineer's Report. Contracts.—Childers Road.—This contract was finished on September 16, and has been inspected by the Public Works Committee. The specified date for completion was August 30. The contractor is therefore seventeen days behind, and is liable to a penalty of £l7. As he was kept back in his work by bad weather and other causes, and the job has been done in a satisfactory manner, I should not recommend that this penalty be enforced. The final payment now due is £llB 14s. Palmerston Road.—The formation of this road is nearly finished, and about six chains have been metalled. Roebuck Road.—The northern part has been formed, and gravel is being put on. Day labor to the amount of £7 has been employed as per pay-sheets, principally in clearing out water channels. The recommendation of the Engineer re Childers Road contract was adopted.

Extraordinary Business. Cr. Graham was appointed a member of the Finance Committee.

Cr. Joyce was appointed a member of the Public Works Committee.

Cr. Joyce suggested that the refuse be cleared off the Taruheru Bridge. Cr. Joyce asked what width Childers Road was metalled.

The Engineer replied thirty feet. Cr. Joyce asked why Palmerston Road had only been metalled sixteen feet wide.

The Engineer said the same quantity of metal had been put on in each case, but as he thought there would be heavier traffic in the Palmerston Road he had it spread thicker in the latter case.

His Worship asked that the notice of motion standing in his name re defining the position of the Engineer as between the Council and the Harbor Board be allowed to lapse.—Agreed to. The notice of motion standing in the name of Cr. Smith respecting the Ranger was allowed to stand over in the absence of the mover.

Payments. Returning Officer.. .. £4 4 0 U.S.S. Co. 7 4 0 \V. E. Cross 8 4 0 James Turton .3 10 0 James Bowman .. 3 10 0 Charles McDeavitt 2 11 0 R. Douglas & Co... 3 9 <) D. Malone.. .. 118 14 0 Petty cash.. 5 0 0