THE DRAINAGE OF LYTTB^t

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 12571, 14 August 1906, Page 8

THE DRAINAGE OF LYTTB^t

BOROUGH COUNCIL v HARBOtJftll BOARD. rM At last nighfa meeting of t'-.-j' Lrt**|l| tclton Borough Council, a letter read from the Lyttelton HarbquV*li Board, inviting the Council to set U*jrJl a sub-committee to confer with a sub-'*!! committee of the Board to ascertain' iM whether the matt«*r.s in dispute tive to tho drainage question could ba HI settled without 'further rccouno ta*aS tho law courts. *J|j In reference to the matter relerrwr'-'ili to in tho Board's letter, tho Mayor 'Wi (Mr S. R. Webb) made tho folipwlnV'si statement:—••Councillors may have ticed in the newspaper reports of tf*Ws recent meeting of the Lyttelton Har- *m hour Board some reference to this deferred question, and are not to blamed if they were Mirpritcd. at the"?« statement that our solicitors had v.iiU *§n ten to tho Board .suggesting a ooft-Jj-jfj fereitoe with a view to «n amicable"Ah settlement. Whilo we are all pleased. *"_! at any opportunity for 6uch. a settle* ment, or, indeed, for v. settlement b» < "*lj any process, it is due to tho CouncU- '/% to say that it lias not modified in the M least degree its attitude concerning thu $3 matter. The two letters attache--hereto will sufficiently explain how thoi*|§ misapprehension arose. Berwick and **«! Harris to Harper, Son and Pmscoe, re- r«| presenting Harbour Board—'As tji^ro ' J& will only lie one more .-itting of Supreme Court before the next eatting'4s| of the Court of Appeal, we would miw. -isi geert that if your clients intend to cccd with this matter, they should do *| so at tho next sittings, as we don't think that, our clients will agio© t<» ■tj tho matter going beyond tho next Court of Appeal' iieswick and Harm ta-a| Town Clerk—'W T e can understand your -M beiug surprised at seeing in the news. 4*l paper account of the Harbour _>ioceediugs that we had written to tba j *| Harbour Board suggesting o confcrenoa_Ji with reference to drainage matter,. W_J_| have ascertained from the Harbour -$| Board that the mistake arose # thi ought'-e)! the reporter taking the suggestion niadfljif { on the order paper as our suggestionuiS It appears that Mr Harper tent Board a copy of our letter, a copy which we now enclose, and tho tary or committee, whoever drew u»y| the xrder paper, headed the par-graph* W& dealing with the matter '"Letter from if| Beswick and Harris,' and then went 'Is on to make tlie suggestion, which, of I JI course, looked as though it came from £0 us. The clerk in the Harbour Board «B Office said ho would get the reporter to >*jjl put the matter right by getting "local" inserted.'" iW In reply to Cr. Cook, - tho Mayor Js£ said that, so far as-he knew, no ''local" ■<» had appeared in tho papers to e_pUiniWJ| how the mistake had arisen. - »Jl| On the motion of Cr. Cook, -eoonded,^ -by Cr. Radcliffe, the letter was Te-'^B ferred to the By-law and Legal (Jom-'jl" mittee to arrange for a conference witlj.||| i the Harbour Board as requested. "^