NAPIER HARBOR BOARD.

Hawke's Bay Herald, Volume XXI, Issue 5328, 12 March 1879, Page 2

NAPIER HARBOR BOARD.

Tuesday, March 11. The board met at 11 a.m. Present — His Worship the Mayor, Messrs Buchanan (Chairman), J. A. Smith, .1. N. Williams, John Stuart, 'Rob Johns, Kinross, Ormond, J. N. Wilson, M. R. Miller, Common, and Lieut. - Colonel Lambert. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. The Secretary then read the usual correspondence, amongst which was the following letter from the Town Clerk : — Napier, March 1, 1879. Sir 1 , — I have the honor by direction of the Municipal Council to request you would inform me whether the Harbor Board would be willing to contribute towards the expense of repairing the bridge leading to the reclaimed land at Port Ahuriri. The reason that this request is made is this, viz., that the roadway is the part the Corporation are expected to keep in repair, and this could be made good far more cheaply and more permanently by removing the bridge and. filling in the space with rubble, leaving only a small culvert there, were it not for the possibly injurious effect it would have on the tidal waters of the reserve belonging to the Harbor Board. As this affects the interests of the board and the board only, and yet materially increases the cost to the Corporation, the Harbor Board are asked to contribute. I have, &c, M. N. Bower, Town Clerk. The Chairman Napier Harbor Board. Mr Stuart moved, " That estimates be called for the work, and that the Harbor Board should contribute half the cost." Mr Robjohns seconded the motion. Mr Ormond said the board had no right to vote expenses for this purpose. It was not a harbor work, and it would be a bad precedent to establish. Colonel Lambert said he did not intend voting for taking over the duties of the Corporation. If the bridge belonged to the Corporation, they were bound to keep it in repair. It would be very unwise of the board to vote money for such works. Mr Vautier said that it was a Govern- ' ment work. He understood the Harbor Board wished to keep the channel open. The motion waß then put and lost by 7 against 4. The secretary read a letter notifying that R. Macalister, Esq., had been appointed auditor of the accounts of the Napier Harbor Board. Mr Ormond moved — " That the Government be asked to authorise the accounts to be made up to the time the old board ceased to exist." Mr Kinross seconded the motion, which was carried. The Chairman read the following letter from the Hon John Sheehan, re the Port Ahuriri Bridge : — Napier, March 3, 1879. Sir, — I have the lionOr to address you with reference to the proposed bridge over the Tutaekuri river at the Spit, Napier. As you are aware, Parliament lias twice voted the money required for the erection of this bridge, but the work, for various reasons, Ims not yet been undertaken. I wish to inform the board that if they approve, the Government will at once take steps to give effect to the vote. No time will bo lost in calling for tendors and starting the work. I have, &c, Jon]* Siieehan. The Chairman Napier Harbor Board. Mr Stuart moved, " That the chairman notify to the Government that this board has no objection to take to the construction of the Port Ahuriri Bridge." Mr Vautier seconded the motion. Mr Smith presumed that it was intended the board should have nothing to do with the financial part of the work. It would ruin them at once. Mr Kinross said that a resolution to that effect had been already passed by the board. Mr Stuart said the present was a new board. Mr Ormond asked that the resolution referred to by Mr Kinross, which had been proposed by him (Mr Ormond)

several months agd^and adopted by the late board, be reaotjto the present members. That resolutfdn was as follows :— That the board #esires to express the 'gratification with^wh'ich it has received the assurance of the Government that it is proposed to proceed with the construction of the Ahuriri bridge,- and the board wM gladly co-operate with the Government m any way. With respect to the site for the bridge, the Government must necessarily obtain.,.the advice of the Marine Engineer of the colony, and in. fixing the site the engineer will, no doubt give due consideration to the necessity of so placing the bridge as not to interfere with the use of the inner harbor by the shipping. Another point which should also be considered is the so placing the structure as to assist the harbor works now nearly completed. The board would therefore urge that the Colonial, Engineer be at once directed to prepare the plans for the bridge." He (Mr Ormond) said this resolution showed that the board were then willing to co-operate. He would now move, as an addition to Mr Stuart's motion, ".provided that the bridge be so constructed, under the advice of the Government Engineer, as not to interfere with the navigation of the harbor." Mr Stuart's motion, as amended by Mr Ormond, was then put and carried. The Secretary then read the following letter from the Inspector of Police : — Constabulary Office, Napier, March 10, 1879. ... Sir,— With reference to a previous application of mine for a suitable site at the Spit ■whereon to erecfc police buildings, I have now the honor to request you will inform the board that having received authority for.theimmcdiate erection of suitable police quarters, they may be pleased to allot for that purpose a section of land at their disposal. I need only observe what a great advantage to the port an adequate police 1 force is; .but until the necessary site for buildings be obtained no improvements in the present arrangements can be effected. I have, &c., Thomas Scttie?, Inspector; The Secretary , ■■ Napier Harbor Board. , , The Chairman thought the request avery reasonable one. The Government had the power to take the site if it were not granted. Mr Smith proposed, "That a committee consisting of Messrs Vautier, Kinross and the mover, visit the Spit with Inspector Scully and report on a site." The Secretary explained that on the 10th April, 1878, a site behind Mr Kinross' store was offered, of which the police authorities did not approve, and nothing had since been done. No reply had been received to the letter then addressed by the board to the Inspector of Police. The motion was put and carried. The Secretary then read the following table of soundings, showing the depth of water on the bar from the 25th of February to the 10th of March, 1879 :— February 25, 26, 27, 12ft ; February 28,, lift 6in ; March 1, lift ; March 2 and 3, lift 6in ; March 4, 12ft ; March 5, 6, and 7, lift 6in ; March 8, 12ft ; March 9, 12ft 6in "; March 10, 12ft. The Secretary read a letter from the engineer, postponed from last meeting, reporting that the harbor works had stood well the effect of the late heavy easterlygale, and recommending twelve additional piles to strengthen the work. Mr Vautier suggested that the matter be deferred till the appointment of the engineer's successor, which was agreed to. The Secretary read a petition signed by Mr Vautier, as chairman of a public meeting, asking that immediate action should be taken to adopt Mr McGregor's plans for a breakwater. After some discussion the petition was received. Mr Stuart moved, " That Mr McGregor be at once communicated with by the board, and requested to come up at once and express an opinion." Several members having spoken for and against the motion, it was eventually put and lost. ' The board then went into committee to consider a letter from Mr Rees, respeoting the action against the Harbor Board by Mr Henderson. After resuming, the secretary was authorised to reply to Mr Rees that the board would take no action in respect to his letter. The board then adjourned.