VINCENT'S DRAIN.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXI, Issue 2541, 23 October 1888, Page 2

VINCENT'S DRAIN.

■J'O THE KDITOR. Sir, —At the last meeting of the Hamilton Borough Council, it was proponed, seconded and carried that a committee be appointed to draw up a statement to date connected with Vincent's drain, after which it was to be submitted to a local solicitor for revision and then forwarded to Auckland for the advice of some leading solicitor. On tho following day a kind of improvised committee was formed by whom it was decided aot to adhere to the decision of the Council, Out instead to grant Mr Vincent £30 rnd he was to do the work. With all due deference, I would beg to state that the first resolution seems to me to be a round-about and expensive way of dealing with the question Is it not trying to make a mountain of a mole hill ? Is there any real necessity for incurring the expense of employing two solicitors? Surely not. Too many cooks may spoil the broth. The Recond resolution, viz., to grant £30 towards the work, lacks precedent, and I would draw the attention of the Council to Clause 222, part 10, of the Municipal Corporations Act, which runs thus:—"No contract, the amount whereof exceeds £20, except in case of urgent necessity, shall be made, except after public tender, of which due public notice shall be given; but the Council shall not be comuellod to accept the lowest or any tender." There is no ambiguity here—the interpretation is easy. It is evident the Council cannot grunt £30 for this work when the Act says £20. By granting the sum, I imagine, it will not enable them to evade the above clause, as some understanding, some specification or agreement must exist which invests the transaction with the title of contract. Hut why g<i all this roundabout and perhaps expensive way, when a very easy and inexpensive way may be had recourse to tide over Hie seeming difficulty ? Why not call for tender? in the usual way ? It has at least the merit of legality. It may be said that a saving of a fe<v pounds would be effected by the grant system as compared with calling for tenders. Just so. But I would beg to remind Councillors that it is impossible to say what expense may be incurred in illegally dealing with the funds of the Borough. To them alone belongs the control of the expenditure; with them alone rests the responsibility.—l am, Sir, yours very truly, BimoKss,

TO THE KDITOR Siu,—There is in Hamilton a savoury spot yclept " Vincent's drain " where odoriferous perfumes at certain seasons of the your, rival the spicy breezes of " Araby the Blest," and whose future history bids fair to be a thorn in the side of our Borough Council in fact it may turn out to be another white elephant, for the manufacture of which, our councillors are so famous. The latest vagary of this sapient body in connection with this drain is worth recording, showing as its does, how very consistent (?) they are in finding some means to get rid of the Borough funds. When I think of our £4000 now lying at a loss at the Bank of New Zealand, I fairly tremble to think of the gulf that is yawning to receive it in. the shape of this draining scheme, which some of our more imaginative councillors have, evolved from out their inner consciousness. It is reported that the large two feet pipes have already been ordered. That the Council should order some fifty odd '•■ expensive pipes for any job not having•; received the sanction of the council, and that in tho face of a resolution passed at the last sitting of that budy "to take legal advice ae to its liability re this drain," which resolution has never been rescinded, is too thin altogether for' belief. At last week's sitting of the Cuuncil, the above resolution as stated was carried. "'That a legal opinion be obtained from an Auckland lawyer as to the Council's liability in this matter of Vincent's drain, and that a committee of;five of the Council, be authorised todraft a case, Ruch case to be first submitted to Mr O'Neill for his approval." This reported to have been over-ridden ; iwkVen ehould this bo the case, there are one' oc two irregularities for which the Council will surely be brought to book : Firstj the resolution as above stated not being rescind'jd ; second, according to the Municipal Corporations Act, "No contract above the sum of twenty pounds can be entered into without having tenders called for it." That the drain requires attending to there is no question, but that*,' tile majority of the Councillors should allow »ny irregularities of the kind referred to above to creep in is where .the error lies, imi what the burgesses altftgether object to. —Yours, &c, .. ■ , ■■ ; ;■:■:■"■'■ .;"' Xt.nx. ! Hamilton East, October 22nd, 1888.