THE PUBLIC BATHS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1247, 23 January 1896, Page 30

THE PUBLIC BATHS.

At the meeting of the City Council on Monday Councillor Fraser moved, “ That the resolution of the Council passed on the 25th April last, deciding upon the erection of two baths, one at Thorndon and one at Te Aro, be rescinded, and that the Council now resolve to erect one central bath for the accommodation of the whole city.” A letter was read from the Women’s Social and Political League, forwarding a resolution passed by the League, viz., “ That it is necessary for the health of the people that the public baths should be proceeded with at once.” Mr W. C. Watson wrote expressing the opinion that the Council had enough to do without committing themselves to any further expenditure of the ratepayers’ money in this connection. Councillor Fraser thought it would he advisable to make one good hath, and the water which would no longer be required for the electric light could be utilised for that purpose, besides which it was better that children should be taught to swim in fresh water than in salt water. The Mayor seconded the motion, with this addition : resolve to erect one central bath for the accommodation of the whole city, and that provision be made for the erection of an open salt-water bath at Tlioi-ndon so soon as a site is offered unconditionally by the Government.” The Council, he said, was being made the butt of people who knew nothing about the matter at all. He contended that it was the influence of the politician that was creeping in; but he objected to people electioneering at the expense of the Council. The addition proposed by the Mayor was allowed by eight votes to five. Councillor Anderson opposed the motion, saying a central bath had not been asked for by the citizens, that it would be a costly affair, and that it would be too far away from the further ends of the city ever to be generally used by the public. He also objected to the projeet to make it a fresh water bath. If a fresh water bath was required why not utilise the reservoir at Polhill Gully. They were on the eve of an election, and this baths question was one by which it was hoped to catch the votes of the people. The Govern- , ment had not put any impediment in the way of making a bath at Thorndon, and any lawyor of repute would toll them they could go to work at once on the strength of what the Government had done. Councillor Willeston sympathised with Councillor Anderson in his efforts for getting a bath at Thorndon, but at the same time ho thought a central bath was required as well. Councillor Tatum moved as an amendment that the Council proceed with the erection of a salt water bath at Thorndon as proposed, and that a fresh water bath be erected in the south-western or north-western corner of the Basin Reserve. Councillor Harris pointed out that this matter was dealt with in the report of the Baths Committee. The Mayor agreed with this view, and ruled the amendment out of order. Councillor Higginbottom strongly s\ipported the proposal for a central bath. Such a lease as that offered by the Government for a bath at Thorndon was not one on which he should feel justified in the rate-

in favour of a bath at Thorndon, and that was all be wanted.

Councillor Devine supported the motion, remarking - that Thorndon had never been very anxious to get a bath, whereas the other end of the town had always kept up its agitation for bathing facilities. He was not averse to Thorndon having a bath, provided an unconditional lease was granted by Hio Government. Councillor Harcourt said the Government had given them all the lease it was in their power to give, and he had no doubt when the term expired that the House of Representatives would grant them a renewal. The bath proposed by Councillor Fraser was an absurdity, and would not meet the requirements of the city. Councillor Myers opposed the motion, and characterised Councillor Tatum’s proposed amendment as a carrot held out to the Thorndon people, which, however, they had wisely refused. The Government had offered them all they could expect and all they had a right to ask, the only stipulation being that the maximum charge should bo 3d, and he thought the Government had acted very handsomely in the matter. He pointed out that it was on his motion the Council decided to instruct the Finance Committee to find =£3ooo to be expended on baths for Te Aro and Thorndon, and had it not been for that motion it was probable the agitation for baths would have been limited to Thorndon. If this resolution was carried the Government would withdraw their offer of a lease, and they w r ould then have to go to the ratepayers for a loan, which he was sure could not be carried, and so there would be no baths at all. Councillor Harris was strongly in favour of a bath for each end of the city, and he should strongly oppose a central fresh water •bath. Most of the houses had bathrooms, and for the Council to cater for fresh water bathing was not what the ratepayers required. They wanted sea bathing and that was what he should vote for. The Government were responsible for the delay in regard to the erection of the Thorndon baths, and he also objected to the Government dictating as to what charges they should inaks. They must, however, to some extent be dictated to, and the obnoxious clauses had been now withdrawn from the lease, with the exception of that relating to the maximum'charge, and the Council were fully prepared to place the baths within the means of the poorest in Wellington. As to Te Aro, it would be possible to pass a Bill through the House of Representatives enabling the Harbour Board to grant them a site for a bath at that end of the town. Councillor Smith pointed out that if a central bath was built it did not necessarily mean that it should bo a fresh water bath. He would suggest that it should be built near the new sea walls at Clyde quay, and made so that it could be drained when the tide was low, in order that they could have fresh water if they liked. . Councillor Barber: Rather than run the risk of losing the baths altogether, he would be prepared to vote for the original motion, viz., to have one bath at Te Aro and one at Thorndon. Councillor Fraser having replied, the motion of Councillor Fraser was then put, and lost by 8 votes to 5. The voting was as follows : Ayes.— The Mayor and Councillors Higginbottom, Devine, Fraser and Smith. .Noes. Councillors Anderson, Myers, Tanner, Vvilieston, Harris, Harcourt, Tatum and Barber. Councillor Anderson then moved the adoption of the report of the Baths Committee. The . effect of the report has already been published. It generally dealt with certain requirements as to the proposed baths at Thorndon and Te Aro, which the Council had decided should be erected. Councillor Myers seconded the motion. Councillor Harris moved as an amendment that clause 3 (suggesting the purchase of Meech’s baths, and the establishment of a fresh-water bath in the Reserve 1 be

proached to know if they will assist the Council in having a short Bill passed through the House vesting part of the foreshore in the Corporation for bath purposes. The amendment was seconded by Councillor Harcourt, and after some discussion was carried. Councillor Higginbottom moved as a further amendment that the whole report be struck out and the matter referred to a public meeting of ratepayers. This amendment was ruled out of order, as was also an amendment by Councillor Tatum for the establishment of a fresh water - bath in the Basin Reserve. The motion for the adoption of the report as amended was lost by 10 votes to 3. The Council then adjourned until Monday next at 7.30 p.m., when a motion by Councillor Devine as to water on the high levels will be considered.