THE CLOCK TOWER.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19735, 27 September 1929, Page 13

THE CLOCK TOWER.

TO TBI EDITOR O* THE PSBS3. Sir, —I think the Clock Tower is really a help to traffic rather than a hindrance, and it is certainly in a place where a clock is required, for the guidance or travellers by the railway. The iron part of it has seen many changes. It was made in Coventry to tlie order of the Canterbury Provincial Council, and was first there put together. It v/ass intended that it should bo put on the stone tower of the Provincial Government Buildings facing Armagh street. For some reason it was never put up, but was stowed away in a place which was afterwards used as a fowlhouse. where it remained until it was presented to the City Council bv Sir George Grey in 1379. The City Council had it dug out and erected in its yard in Oxford terrace, where it remained for some fifteen or sixteen years, when it was taken down and erected iri its present position. The ironwork of the tower was put up by the Council by day labour, but the windows of the first stage and the woodwork of the dial stage were done by Mr Gavin Watson from designs by the late Mr Strouls, the architect. Though the tower was not put where it was originally intended to be, the clock was put at the top of the stone tower, where, though it was invisible, it continued to strike the hours for the benefit of those in the vicinity until it was moved to its present position. It never kept very good time where it is, and required to bo adjusted nearly every time it was wound up. No doubt it is now feeling the weight of its seventy years. I do not go nearly a«_ well now as when I walked six miles a day to school and back 70 years sine*-.—Vo'irs, etc., OUDEIS. September 26th, 1929. SO THE EDITOB O* THE PRESS Sir, —To anv citiaen who may have at heart the welfare of his native City the proceedings at the meeting of the chief governing body on September 16th are not encouraging. What right has the Council to decide to sweep away as so much lumber an example of workmanship the origin of which many of them probably never understood? The association of that tower with the memory of the men who were responsible for the erection of the Old Provincial Buildings and the Council Hiall, of which we are justly proud, should give it some right to consideration. It gives us cause for regret that the construction was not completed on the site originally intended—opposite the Art Gallery. The clock and bell were installed there and struck tho hours for some years, but the iron structure (as an article in your columns has mentioned) was left in + he Council yard (now the site of the Scott Statue) until erected in its present position as the Diamond Jubilee Memorial. The most serious aspect of the Council's action is that it exhibits a total lack of proportion in its views of the requirements of the present-day City, and due regard to the opinion of those of us who would wish to retain, with some degree of sincerity, the monuments standing to remind us of the works and people of earlier days. There is no real necessity at the present time to remove the tower; it would be far better to spend the money on repairs. Although it is true that in the davs of its erection the present mechanical traction was not expected to reach such proportions, then there is now a more urgent need for means by which the motor can be kept within bounds. If the memorial is demolished, probably the first result will be a request for an island or safety ssone in its place. The shif »ng ol the Godley Statue from its rightful place has brought for Christchurch nothing but hard words and illwill and strife over the ground that it stood on. Let us consider well before committing another act and adding another blemished page to our civic history.—Yours, etc., OLD ACQUAINTANCE. September 26th, 1929