GERALDINE COUNTY CONCIL.

Temuka Leader, Issue 2151, 17 January 1891, Page 2

GERALDINE COUNTY CONCIL.

The following business was transacted at Wednesday's meeting of the Geraldine County Council in addition to that reported in our last issue : The striking of a rate over the Waitohi water district, of which notice had been given, was held over until the engineer had seen Mr Talbot. In respect of the Tengawai bridge Mr Howell said the necessity for a stock bridge was become very great through the popularity of the Point sales, and he would move that the bridge be repaired and extended as proposed by the engineer.—Mr Marchant said one-seventh of the estimate was for repairing the old traffic bridge, the rest for the new stock bridge. This he proposed to make 6ft wide between the rails, and 4ft 2in at the floor, the whole supported by iron jail piles.—Mr Mackay seconded Mr Howell's motion, which was carried.

As the litigation respecting the Parsora bridge is not yet wound up, it was decided not to take any action respecting that bridge.

The Geraldine Eoad Board sent an account for repairs to the Orari and G-eraldine bridges during 1890, and a report that the Geraldine bridge is in very bad condition, both as to decking and joints.—Account accepted; consideration of repairs deferred. A letter to the Defence Department elicited the reply that the police officers could not be permitted to ac as collectors of the dog tax, though they would render what assistance they eould in carrying out the Act, Mr C. E. Sherratt, clerk to the Licensing Committee of Kaukapuka, applied for an increase of his salary from 12s 6d to 40s per annum. Granted.

Accounts amounting to £222 were passed for payment. Mr E. A. Barker moved, pursuant | to notice, that a permanent overseer be employed at a salary of £250 per annum. He produced figures showing that in two years the council had expended £5130 on bridges and water races, and the expenses of engineers and clerk of works had been £915, or 17£ per cent, of the whole.—The engineers submitted a long letter in which they contended that the plan proposed by Mr Barker could not be economical, and offered to do much of the work they have been doing for separate charges for a fixed sum of £l2O per annum.—Mr Howell, who seconded the motion pro forma, agreed that Mr Barker had done a great deal of good by bringing the motion forward, but he did not think it would be wise to carry it. He did not think it would effect any saving. A clerk of works could not, as Mr Barker supposed, be wholly dispensed with if they had an overseer. He would move that the offer of Messrs Meason and Marchant be accepted and given a fair trial.—After a long discussion Mr Howell's amendment, seconded by Mr Quinn, was carried by four to one. This concluded the business.