CARPETS AT THE TAKAHE

Press, Volume LXXXV, Issue 25735, 22 February 1949, Page 6

CARPETS AT THE TAKAHE

OBJECTIONS MADE BY VISITORS WALL-TO-WALL COVERING “NOT IN KEEPING” Whether wall-to-wall carpeting in the main lounge was in keeping with the design of the Sign of the Takahe was discussed by the City Council last evening. A petition presented by Cr. Mary McLean on behalf of a number of women, including overseas visitors who visited the Sign of the Takahe yesterday, urged.the council not to have a wall-to-wall carpet, and claimed that such a floor covering was completely “out of character.” Cr. McLean said the visitors had bec.i loud in their praise of the general beauty of the Takahe, but they had been emphatic that to cover completely such a lovely floor was wrong. The visitors suggested that big, movable rugs should be put on the lounge floor. Wall-to-wall carpeting was incongruous in such surroundings. Cr. L. G. Amos said that a special sub-committee, aided by experts, had already spent much time in coming to a decision in this matter. The proposed wall-to-wall carpet was Turkish and the pattern was of a design drawn about 1612, so that it was not out of keeping. One objection there had been to wall-to-wall carpet was that the lounge might be needed for dancing. Members of the sub-committee felt that the two other uncarpeted rooms would be better for dancing. Putting movable rugs in the room would put the legs of the big fable out of balance. The Mayor (Mr E. H. Andrews) said that medieval castles would probably have had rush mats rather than wall-to-wall carpet. One of the conditions under which the lease of the Takahe was given was that dancing might be held, and he understood that the lessee favoured the lounge for dancing. Cr. J. N. Clarke joined Cr. Amos in opposing the petition. A motion that the petition be referred to the reserves committee was narrowly defeated. It was then claimed that the petition could not be referred directly to the sub-Committee dealing with the Takahe. since it was not appointed by the council, and that it was discourteous to some of the distinguished signatories to the petition to treat it as it had been treated. After some further discussion the petition was referred to the reserves committee. with power to act. Cr. Amos was the onlv dissentient.