"STONEWALL."

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 9, Issue 601, 21 January 1921, Page 2

"STONEWALL."

CR. PATTERSON’S ATTITUDE. COUNCILLORS EXASPERATED,

The necessity for having a time limit for “speeches” made at the Pukekohe Borough Council’s meeting was vividly demonstrated on Wednesday night,, when Cr. A. P. Daysh, chairman of the Works Committee, in accordance with notice of motion given at a previous meeting, moved that in future all footpaths be tarred and sanded from the inside instead of from the kerb and channelling. Cr. Keith seconded the motion. The meeting was convened for S o'clock, but at this hour a quorum was not present., and after a wait for about 20 minutes Cr. Patterson ‘ blew in” in a hurry and mentioned that he wanted to go to Chautauaua. At intervals Crs. Bilkey, Keith and Daysh put in an appearance. Cr. Patterson was “barracked” frequently by fellow councillors because he wanted to get away to the Chautauqua entertainment, and with a view of acceding to his request the Mayor asked that the paysheet lie brought forward. This was done and the accounts passed for payment, i Then Cr. Daysh moved his motior and, also with a view of letting hif colleague away, said that he would not say anything about the matter I because all knew the position. The motion originated from a recommend- ( ation of the Works Committee.

The proposal was about to bo pul at 20 minutes past nine, when Cr Patterson sprang to his feet and said “Alright, I’ll keep you here till 1? o’clock.” He strongly advocated the tarring and sanding of all footpaths from the-kerb and channelling, claiming that this procedure would prove far more beneficial than that proposed by Cr. Daysh, One of the advantages of his idea, added Cr. Patterson, would be to make owners clean the weeds and grass from the front of their respective properties, thus presenting a respectable appearance. Cr. Daysh’s idea was only encouraging people to allow these weeds and grass to grow up on the insidr while the kerb and channelling would also be overgrown, and in a short time could not be found. He also advocated the planting of trees about the centre of the path, thus making an avenue. By this time Cr Patterson had traversed over the whole ground, but more than once, twice, three times and even four times, and his fellow councillors were becoming irritable, and more than once asked the Mayor if Cr. Patterson was tlv only councillor allowed to vent, hif views. In spite of protests and interjections he was allowed to continue all the time repeating his remarks and stating that he had the floor and when other councillors rose to speak the Mayor reminded them of the fact that Cr.Patterson had the floor. Hr occupied the floor from '2O minutes past nine until about 5 minutes past 10, and towards the finish asked for an assurance from Cr. Daysh that if the previous resolution was rescinded, that each street would bf dealt with on its merits, as to wcthei it should be tarred and sanded froir the inside or from the outer edge Cr. Daysh refused to give the as-

surance but Cr. Patterson insisted and Cr. Daysli remarked: “If yor stand there all night I won’t give you an assurance. Cr. Daysh was ouite right in standing firm, because lie was only one councillor and one member of the Works Committee Still Cr. Patterson insisted and Cr Daysh rose to reply but was told that Cr. Patterson had the floor. Cr. Daysh interjected and said h|! had s interject, but Cr. Patterson jokingTyTiSTcPTTc covfld have him removed. “ You would not remove me'/’ retorted Cr. Daysh, much to the amusement of the Mayor and Councillors. One councillor reminded the Mayor that if this thing continued he would not have a quorum. Eventually someone suggested that the matter of footpaths bo loft with the Council to deal with on their merits from time to time. Cr. Patterson moved an amendment accordingly, which was seconded by Cr. Bilkcy and carried, the voting being:—For the amendment: Crs Patterson, Bilkcy, Hamilton and Keith: against; Crs. Daysh, Morrow and McGough.

A peculiar thing about the voting was that Cr. Keith, who seconded the motion moved by Cr. Daysh voted for the amendment. Cr. Patterson then moved that Prospect Terrace and Queen Street bo tarred and sanded from the kerbin <r and channelling, Cr. Bilkey seconded, The voting was:—For the motion: Ci'S. Patterson, Bilkcy and Hamilton. Against: Crs. Daysh, Morrow and MeGough. The Mayor cast his vot in favour of the motion, mentioning that it would do no harm to give Cr. Patterson’s proposal a trial. Cr. Keith did not vote, staling that be was opposed to tarring on the outside for the reason that the inside of the path was some inches higher than the outside and this allowed the water to penetrate under the tar and sanding thus making the surface spongy.