WAIPAWA COUNTY COUNCIL

Waipawa Mail, Volume I, Issue 6, 2 October 1878, Page 2

WAIPAWA COUNTY COUNCIL

The usual monthly mee\, g of the Waipawa County Council iva. i,,,i,i vaa _ terday at 11.30 a.m. There werv prese nt_ Messrs Mackersey (Chairman), > 0 hnston Lawrence, Rathbone, Levy, and Wick A letter was read from Mr JohuvVhitc Porangahau, stating that he paid r^ eß G n twelve thousand acres of land, wq l0 ut receiving any benefit from expendi, re . To get his wool to market during the ensuing season, it would be necessury- or him to make several cuttings and bridgt a stream, the cost of which would be aboit £SO. lie requested the Council to assis. him in the work.

The matter was referred to the County Engineer. A letter was read from the Postmaster at Napier, in reply to a requisition from the Council, stating that he (the Chief Postmaster) did not think that the amount of correspondence would justify the postal authorities in forwarding two mails each way daily to places along the railway line. He would lay the matter before the head of the department. Considerable discussion took place as to the preparation of the rolls for the various ridings during the next election. The clerk was authorised to insert the necessary notices in the Waipawa Mail in uddition to the Napier papers. The polling places for the several ridings were fixed as follows :

Waipawa Riding—Waipawa and Hampden. Waipukurau Riding—Waipukurau. Woodville—Woodville and Dannevirk. Norse wood Norsewood and Ormond* ville. Tamumu—Tamumu. Eparaii n i I —W a 1 lingford. Porangahau—Porangahau and Wainui. Patangata—Patangata and Kaikora. Rua Tanuwha—Onga Onga and AshleyClinton. A letter was read from the Chairman of the Rua Tanuwha Road Board, asking the assistance of the Council for the construction of roads in that portion of the county. The matter was referred to the County Engineer. In reference to a memorial from residents of Waipawa, requesting that the road between the railway station and the river be repaired, the County Engineer recommended that the work be done. The cost would be about £7O. It appears a considerable width of the road had been taken by the Government in constructing the railway, and that it is now too narrow for the traffic. Mr Bold stated that there was no means of widening the road except by the purchase of land on the other side of the roads. Mr Rathbone moved that the recommendation of the Engineer as to the expenditure of £7O in repairing the road be adopted, the amount to be deducted from the expenditure in the riding. Seconded l>y Mr Lawrence and carried. Mr Lawrence drew attention to an advertisement calling for tenders for the construction of 105 chains of the Wai-pawa-Tamumu road. The expenditure had not been sanctioned Il3' t T *-~ Council ; ami lie thought the Engineer litnKx*. ceded Mr Rathbone bad a distinct recollection that the work was sanctioned by a vote of the Council. The Chairman said there was no such record in the minutes. Still, it remained for the Council to say whether they would sanction the expenditure. Mr Lawrence explained that when the report of the Engineer recommending that the work he carried out was brought up, he moved that the subject be reconsidered at a future meeting, Mr Bold to furnish another report in the meantime. That resolution had not been rescinded. The County Engineer stated that there was a balance of money left unappropriated for the riding, which he thought might be available for the portion of the district which was said to he neglected. He had received no instructions as to Mr Lawrence’s resolution, and he therefore thought the report was confirmed by the Council. If he erred, it was inadvertently, and legreetted that there should hava been a misunderstanding on liis part. Mr Johnston moved that no tender be accepted for the work until the Council was in receipt of another report from Mr Bold as to the expenditure in the Patangata Riding.

Mr Rathbone objected to Mr Johnston’s motion being put without notice, as it would rescind a previous motion of the Council.

Mr Levy was of opinion that the road was one which the money should be expended. It would not be fair to put those who had tendered to unnecessary trouble, which would be the case if the tenders were not opened. The Chairman said the question was a technical one, and should not be discussed on its merit. It was a question of the observance of the regulations which should guide the proceedings of the Council. Mr Johnston concurred in the views of the Chairman.

Mr Rathbone had no doubt that tho work had been sanctioned l»y- the Council. After Mr Lawrence’s motion, Mr Bold attended and made a verbal explanation The work was then put to the vote of tho Council and carried.

Mr Herrick also recommended the expenditure being sanctioned b3 r the Council. A mistake had been made in not entering it upon the minutes. He thought it would not be advisable for the Council to bind the Engineer to expend money on any particular road, so long as lie did not exceed the amount allotted to a riding. Mr Johnston’s motion was then put and carried by the casting vote of the Chairman, who remarked that lie would l>e sorry to see the Council ignore its own regulations. It was moved by Mr Levy and seconded by Mr Lawrence, tliat the accounts as endorsed by the Finance Committee bo passed for payment.—Carried. Mr Herrick moved, and Mr Rathbone seconded, that all statements made by officers of the Council should be taken down by the clerk in writing *

On the motion of Mr Lawrence, tho Dog Inspector was authorised to summon all defaulters.

This concluded tho business of tho ordinary meeting. A speciul meeting of the Council was held at two p.m. Present—Mr Mackersey (Chairman), Lawrence, Herrick, Johnston, and Levy. On the motion of Mr Johnston, seconded by Mr Lawrence, the resolution altering the boundaries and number of ridings and members was confirmed. The Council then adjourned.