THE FIRE BELL.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume XLVIII, Issue 8921, 9 September 1905, Page 5

THE FIRE BELL.

AND THE NEW TOWER

BOROUGH COUNCIL DISCUSSION

At Wednesday's meeting of the Borough Council the firebells and the new steel tower came in for a good deal of discussion. The borough appears to have been> very unfortunate in its selection of firebella and although a considerable amount ol money has been spent thereon the requirements of the place remain unsatisfied. Both bells -have failed, but the problem as to which is the better remains. This controversy was renewed by the need for deciding as to which should be put ia the new tower. Although the one at the Fire Brigade station has proved a failure in all its' past trials it has. been repeatedly recommended by experts who liavedeclared that if hung properly it would give the correct tone, and" is in every "way a firstclass fireboll. The bell7-which has within the "past few days been-taken down from the old station (next the Borough "Chambers) was procured from Messrs A. and T. Burt, of Dunedio, its predecessor having - cracked one frostynight, on the occasion of an alarm of fire. It cost the Council-£24 in Dimedin, -and was purchasecTas a first-class article, but as its tone did not give satisfaction, not- ■ that various methods- of win.... - — ified. the Council-decided hanging it wei*, — ' . - --^-i-o Messrs "to have it re-cast and it was sejtv .. Cable and Co., Wellington. In Wellington it was re-cast, a quantity of gun-metal was added to it, and the shape was slightly altered. -This -was done at an additional cost of £8 to the borough. The bell was then rehung and although experimented with in. various ways, it was still found to be unsuitable. In consequence of this it Was decided. when the new station and tower were erected, that a new bell should be- purchased and the one then in use sold. The new bell wa6 procured at" a cost of £8, but it was soon-regarded as being less effective than the old one. Cr Wilson, set the discussion- goi«g *S tjie Council by moving, That the resolution passed at a fbrmet meeting (providing that the bell from the station t-ower be removed to the new eteel tower, and that the bell from the old tower be put in_it« place) be rescinded. He did not consider the bell oh the station was-afty good, and eaid that the other evening people standing a few chains away .did not know it was a. fire bell that was ringing — they thought it might be a cow bell. He wanted the "old" bell put in the new tower. Or Goodsbn seconded the motion. - Cr Hardley moved, as- an -amendment, That both bells be given, fair trials. He thought, that perhaps through some defect in the hanging or, for some other reason the new bell was not heard to advantage. Cr Sargeson~secondedr _ Cr Wilson said that to give each bell a fn.iT trial" the bell would have to be fixed with some approach to permanency, and this would-cosb a few pounds, perhaps £3. Cr Brunette said" that if anyone knew all about firebells Cr Wilson should know, "and considering-this he would support the resolution). The Mayor considered that the bell on the station had" never had a fair show. , Gr_ Goodson said, that before the bells weTe tested he would like to see the "feet" oX the tower more securely braced. •A division, was then taken on, the amendment, the Mayor,."Crs Brunette, Cameron, Whittington, Hardley,' ' Sargeson, and Pacey voting for it, and Ore Wilson and Goodson against it k The amendment wasrcaTifed. The matter haying been broached by Cr' Goodson t.hat the tower needed strengthening by some means", a discussion arose immediately upon the passing of the above resolution. . - — Cr Cameron, moved, That the Foreman .be instructed to see that "the "feet" of -the, new steel tower" were more strongly secured by means of buttresses a.t each foot.- r- - - Or Sargeson said his opinion was that piere" should be .placed at each corner, and bhe tower otherwise strengthened, but he j would like to Jiear-Crs W_hittington and I Pacey on the "subject: ' ' - Cr-Brunette seconded the resolution. He f nought that the feet, should -be bound to each other. ~ ■ The Mayor_said he did- not wish to discourage the -motion, but did not think fur-ther-strengthening was necessary. Cr Hardley thought that further strength was unnecessary, .but the lower- portion," should be stayed if anything were- done. About four feet of the lower portion, of the tower as it r now stood was meant-io have been sunk in concrete. If this porf tion were made firmer it would be all that* was necessary. Cr Pacey emphatically declared that the Council" wa6 "messed up"- "with regard to fire towers and firebells. It was a colossal piece of extravagance, ho considered, that the new steel- tower should have been got at all. With regard to the tower, he said it wa6 put up wrongly in the firefc instance on the advices of some Councillors who -thought they" knew all about' bell towers.- It-wna all very well to ask the opinions of Gr Whittington and himself nowjthat-the damage had been dome, and various persons had had a try to get the thing to work" according to their particular ideas. "\Vhy were Cr Whittington and myself not consulted in the first place?" he asked. "The thing was a, botch now 7 and would always remain so." The resolution was carried.

Later in. the .meeting Cr Wilson -said that the resolution- had gone through before^ ho realised that it was going- to be carried. - He thought that the, necessary firmness and strength should be added to the tower by means of a concrete wall. This would cost less than would the proposed - buttresses^- He moved _ that the work be held over for one month. Cr Hardley seconded the resolution. Or- Cameron : If it "will stand for the month it will stand for ever.

The motion was carried.

Ct -Wilson then moved, That the -Foreman be instructed to prepare estimates of the proposed means "of strengthening the tower — by buttresses and by a concrete-" wall.

Cr Hardley seconded this motion, which ■wan carried, and the matter was thus disposed of 'for the time being.