DUPED!

Sun (Christchurch), Volume VI, Issue 1786, 4 November 1919, Page 3

DUPED!

WOOLSTON'S DISCOVERY. The members of the Woolston Borough Council have discovered that authority they thought they had is really vested in the North Canterbury Hospital and Charitable Aid Board. When further consideration was given at last evening's meeting of the council to the petition of a number of ratepayers respecting the fumes froiti the Woolston Tanneries, the clerk read from the Public Health Act, which set out the Hospital Board as the controlling body for the district in regard to such nuisances. Cr J. C. Hobson said that people had called on him, stating that the smell during the week was "something awful." It seemed that the council was a nonentity. He moved that steps be taken to write to the l%?al authority concerned, asking that stops be taken to abate the nuisance. Cr J. L. Grant said they must do their best by the residents of the district. They should keep on agitating till the nuisance was abated. Cr G. T. Owen thought they should have "concrete" evidence to place before the board, even if they had to resort to reference to Cr Mcßae's pudding. That might impress the board! The pudding, it may be explained, was referred to at a previous meeting of the council, Cr Mcßae stating that he knew of one householder whose pudding had been tainted by fumes from the tauneries. Cr D. Mcßae: Why should Dr Chesson come here and make a great speech —and begging. Now we have to go to the* Ac/. It is a dog-in-the-manger business. We were duped, and he only came here as a blind. I can tak* Dr Chesson te three houses where the curtains fell off the rings with the fumes. I am not looking for notoriety. No man in the council gets more of these fumes than I do. I do not think that people should be punished by fumes being allowed to go into their houses night and day. One gentleman has three children suffering from bad eyes as the result of fumes. You can mention the pudding 'it you like. (Laughter.) The motion was carried. Cr T. E, Badcliffe moved that the board-be urged not to grant any further permits to the Woolston Tanneries to manufacture hydrochloric or muriatic acid. Cr Mcßae seconded the motion, which was carried.