Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1679.

Evening Post, Volume XVII, Issue 320, 15 January 1879, Page 2

Evening Post. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 15, 1679.

The time at length has come when our City Council must be prepared to be brought face to face with the practical aspect of the city drainage question. The idle procrastination, weak vacillation, and hesitating uncertainty — relieved only by occasional blind "leaps in the dark"— which hitherto have been the salient features of the Council's action, no longer will serve to avert the dreaded day when definite steps must be taken to carry into effect one or other of the schemes to which the Council stands committed. The discussion which took place in committee yesterday afternoon appears to indicate that, this conviction at length is dawning even on the tardy apprehensions of Councillors themselves. Short, and somewhat sharp, as was that debate, it nevertheless contained the germs of much that may develope into useful action or useless dissension, according to what happens to be the temper of Councillors to-morrow night, when the whole question necessarily must come np for consideration, under Councillor Fishbr's motion that Mr. Climib be appointed Drainage Engineer. It is not our present purpose to enter into a comparative analysis of the various schemes which have been submitted to the Council, and more or lew definitely accepted. That we have done very fully on previous occasions. Nor is it necessary to define precisely the process by which Mr. Clihib gradually and almost imperceptibly blossomed into full bloom as the apostle of Wellington drainage. Suffice it to say, that the only step ventured on by the Council in the direction of city drainage prior to Mr. Climib's advent was to offer a premium of £50 for the bent competitive scheme. The absurdity ot offering so small a premium for a work of such magnitude subsequently became obvious even to the Council, and one member apologetically explained that a complete drainage scheme was not expected, but only a " wrinkle." In due course eleven "wrinkles" were contributed, and referred to three competent arbitrators, woo pronounced them all so utterly worthless and unpractical that none could be recommended as even the "best" among the bad. One, however, was indicated as the "least bad," and to this was the premium of £50 awarded and paid, notwithstanding a very strenuous protest from the Hon. Mr. Bucklbt, then a City Councillor. Briefly, the plan consisted in discharging all tbe city sewage into two gigantic pots sunk in the harbor, outside the breastwork. It is needless to add that it was not carried out. With the presentation of Mr. Clikib's first report, however, a new order of things arose, and our present object is to dissipate, so far as possible, the mists in which, designedly or otherwise, the supervening events have been involved, and to demonstrate as clearly and concisely as we can the precise points which the Council will have to determine. First, then, Mr. Climib's scheme was adopted by the Council, subject to the illegal and ridiculous proviso, that it should be submitted to a plebiscitum. We term it "ridiculous" because these Councillors had been elected to deal with just such matters as this, which now. they sought to shirk the responsibility of deciding. Even recently a proposal actually* was made to repeat the absurdity, on the plea that " persons outside the Council were quite as able as Councillors to settle questions of the kind." If this be the case, then Councillors must have grossly neglected their doties; for they were elected to manage such affairs, and had the advantage of special facilities for so doing, in the shape ot information and advice not accessible to tbe outside public, who had a right to expect their chosen representatives to perform tbe functionsentrusted to them. However, the illegal plebiscitum was held, and the public, knowing nothing at all about the details, and only anxious to see some distinct plan of drainage adopted, approved tbe scheme by a large majority. Bmt the Councillors even yet were nervous and unhappy. They next appended another condition — that the scheme should be approved by Mr. Blackbtt, who, as Consulting Engineer for the waterworks, had inspired just confidence. That gentleman, however, declined to act, and Mr. NApibr Bkll was substituted, who unequivocally condemned the whole scheme; but founding bis condemnation mainly on the small advantage taken of gravitation, which was the inevitable result of the position in which the Council had insisted on Mr. Climib placing the pumpiag station. Mr. Clivxb, in a very able reply, completely demolished Mr. Bbll's criticism, and the Council taring fettered their adoption of tbe scheme by the condition of Mr. Bill's

approval, were reduced once more to mental chaos. At this stage Mr. Clark arrived in Australia to devise drainage schemes for Sydney and, Adelaide, -and his services in a similar capacity were secured for Christchurch. Councillor Losah proposed that Mr. Climib's scheme should be submitted to this distinguished hydraulic engineer, and- the Council eagerly hailed the suggestion. Mr. Clar& came, saw and reported, furnishing what he expressly termed a " re-arrangement" of Mr. Climib's scheme, while retaining its main features. The Council instantly, and unhesitatingly adopted the "re-arrangement scheme," and fondly imagined that at length they had attained tbe haven of sanitary rest. But alas ! Mr. Climie speedily and rudely dispelled that pleasing dream by utterly repudiating this "re-arrangement" of bis schme, declaring it to be essentially different from his oWn, utterly- impracticable, and abounding in errors, both theoretical and arithmetical. On the horns of this dilemma the Councillors, therefore, remain impaled. If they definitely adopted Mr. Clixib's scheme, and Mr. Clark's " Re-arrangement " be a new scheme, as contended by Mr. Climib, then the resolution adopting the latter was inoperative because the former one was not rescinded. If they fall back on Mr. Climie's scheme they take up one which they had expressly resolved only to adopt if approved by Mr. Bell — who condemned it — or by Mr. Clark — who so " re-arranged "it that its reputed father was unable to recognise his offspring and disowned its parentage— they do this in direct opposition of the best engineering advice obtainable, for which, moreover, they paid £1000 sterling. If they appoint Mr. Climib Drainage Engineer for Mr Clark's scheme, they call oh him to carry out a plan which he has declared wholly impracticable. In all these -complexities have Councillors involved themselves by their miserable vacillation. Yet one course or other must be taken and boldly pursued without delay. Councillor Logan has promised that to-morrow evening he will bring forth so vast an array of unimpeachable adverse authorities as to crush Mr. Clark beyond hope of redemption. It is fortunate, perhaps, for Councillor Logan that Mr. Clakk is too far off to reply to his threatened criticism, but pending the rising of this new engineering luminary, and while as yet unenlightened by his explanatory rays , it really appears to us that the Councillors' only safe line of conductis to abide by the one definite resolution arrived at— that adopting Mr Clark's scheme, and to appoint a competent engineer, whether Mr. Climib or anyone else, under the direction of the City Engineer, to carry it into immediate execution. Any other course inevitably must involve them in new and even more formidable complications.