DRAINS AT DOUGLAS.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXVII, Issue 39, 16 October 1913, Page 7

DRAINS AT DOUGLAS.

COUNTY COUNCIL PROTEST. The chains at Douglas have been I fcrquoutlyj brought under the notice I of the County Council. At its meeting last month, Mr C. F. Chapman, a I Douglas settler, waited on the Conn- I cil and asked that the Government be urged to carry out certain cleaning ' work. The Council was .sympathetic, ; and the Chairman and the East Rid- i ing members (Messrs Were and Walter) were deputed to inspect the locality and report. The Chairman reported verbally to the Council yesterday. Cr. Hathaway said that' oh the northernmost piece of Mr Chapman's laud there was a drain on the west side of the railway about thirty chains long, in which there was about eighteen inches of stagnant water. Hefore the railway was built this drain, Ino doubt, had outlet to the County drain. Mr Chapman desired that-the Council should call on the Department to clear the drain. From what he had seen of the land he .thought it was excellent land, capable of carrying a cow to the acre in the summer months. If, however, the drains iiad no outlet the land would he useless. Soon the water in the drains would be forced back and convert it again into a swamp. The idea seemed to be that Mr Chapman should'have an outlet to the main drain. There was not much silt in the drain, hut there was a great deal of growth. If the drain was left alone for a year the water would be, up to the level of the land. It was the main drain and took the.water from the County drain on the road. The damage at present was not great but with a dry summer the adoumulation of vegetable growth would block the drain. Before the Council took any action the solicitor's opinion should be obtained. Cr. Were said Mr Chapman had good cause to complain. • At the northern end of his land the drains were for- 1 merly served by the County drain, but the outlet was cut off by the railway line. i.iThe land was comparatively dry afo present. To promote a 'proper flow Mr Chapman's section of drain would need to lie cleared out. He understood this had been done. '.The Counicl was merely calling on the Government to elegit.,tig., drain t in the same manner as they-''|vou|d" call oil; an ordinary settler t6 v, eTe:ar ti drain to take water from .land? him. . Cr. Walter-saicf had to pay,a separate rate to clean out a drain ,foy v wM<fh,h.e Jh£jlnse> "outlet] i It! was,no,t pnly Mr Chaprmjn,S*vbo-.Mould puffer daanage. Very soon the road would,.be,j damaged.. J; The l^6dnty 'jnic! cleaned theit iftikV a ..half be,yond n -, : [ t}|e,,i r governs ment drain. The Eiailwny jDepartiiiettt had informed settlere'Qffaf ■ llie'y- hkf not reppgni.se any liability to maintain the drain, and this despite the fact that the line had cut off .previous drain outlets. '

Tlie chairman explained that the Counicl had not previously approaehecl on the question.'' W $.4 'was finally deeMe\y^,^i7^;^h'e c iX'partin'eWt ito clear the drains on 'ftk'JnAjpei'ty.j .——!—— • Cr. Hathaway then reported bomplaint made by Mr' G'. 'Jennings; another settler in the vicinity. Mr ! f'eniiiugs complained l ' of vvater ruulilig' 6'tt' "to his land from the Toko itream. He - said ! xliii the Council !iad so diverted the: Water, but this vas not a fact. He (Cr. Hathaway) told Mr Jennings that he had no real complaint against the Council. He could not see, that the Council could go on private land to open up a drain, vlr Jennings said the water coming [own the drain had washed away a n-idge. As far as he (Cr. Hathaway) ould see it would be necessary to :ave a drain of double the present •apaeity in the vicinity of the bridge. There was only trouble when there vas a severe storm of rain. A remedy would be to make the creek wider and deeper. Mr Jennings said the Council was unfairly denying him a remedy, but he (Cr. Hathaway) .had .'•one into the question with an opei: mind and had reported impartially. The work Mr Jennings wanted would • ost five or six Hundred pounds. s Cr. Walter said Mr Jennings warthe only settler who thought he had i grievance in the matter, and he denied that anybody could be found who would say that Mr Jennings really had a grievance.

The Engineer said it would Ire impossible to keep the land from flooding at certain times.

j Cr. Walter objected to the serious manner in which the matter had been discussed, the suggestion being that Douglas land suffered greatly from bad drainage. He objected to the land being labelled in that fashion. 'Not a pound's worth of damage was done by water in a year. In the case of Jennings, the water only came over on rare occasions when there was •severe rain and only about three acres of land was flooded for only a few hours. There was no flooding unless the rain was ' exceptionally severe. Such a rain storm might happen twice a year,"or perhaps not at ail during the year. Tt was decided that no action be taken.