COUNTY MATTERS.

Taranaki Herald, Volume LIV, Issue 13798, 2 November 1908, Page 3

COUNTY MATTERS.

(To the Editor.) Sir,— As you liavo soon lit to devote a leading article to accuse some of the Omata count y members of unfair criticism and animus to the engineer, I take it 1 am one oi the members you refer jo. As myself and Councillor Adlnm arr the only Councillors that travel tliii part <»f the road and sec what is going on, we arc the only ones thai are able to criticise. Xow in as. lew words as I can T will endeavour to show that there has been no unfair criticism or animus about it. With regard to the engineer's work in building bridges, 1 don't think any of the Councillors have had anything to say. 1 for one gi\o him credit for his work, and as far as L know he has done good work, but the earthwork contracts in this riding have not been satisfactory to my mind, and with your permission I will give a few of m*,- reasons for criticising some of the job* he has passed. The first job I criticised was the Okato footpath. Some three years since the ratepayers here petitioned the County Council to give them a footpath on one side of the street. They (the ratepayers) subscribed some I'lß to pay for the kerbing. As the Council after a time was going to lower the main road, the engineer was to go and grade the road and put in pegs for the footpath, so that it would not have to be altered when the road was put to its proper level. Well, Mr Editor, if you arc passing through Okato at any time just have a look at it now. After the timber had been lying some si\ months on the ground I happened to meet the engineer and begged him to do the job, as we wanted to got on with it before t lie wet weather set in. What did he do i He put a few pegs in that the first children coming from school were able to kick out : then some two months after this the surf. ice foreman gets a^ mii'l oi plan that no one could understand. I showed this plan to men who! were carrying out contracts under Mr Murray and they could not understand them. What is the next thing we find r The men started work; I went up some two da\s after, and what do you think 1 found!-' They were putting the footpath eighteen inches above people's vciandahs. There were some four or live pounds spent and all had to be hit ion parsed authorising Mr Skinner Ma/ucs me for tins; said I interfered »ith i(. 1 deny it; I was not there when it was commenced. I stopped the men alter they had been at work some 1 lime, when 1 saw the mess they were making. I brought this up at the time 'icfore the Council and there was a rcso- j hit ion passed authorising Mr Skinner j ro pay for this mistake, but by some means or other this resolution was cscinded some three months afterAard-.. This footpath will cost the Vmr.oil some seven or eight pounds to nit down to its proper level, making il together some twelve pQiinds more I han it should have cost originally. ' This is unfair criticism No. 1. Now \e come to the Woods estate. Sonic he months since the Council decided to ijirchasc a small piece of land that the iVood.s Uros. complained the river lowed over. f was authorised to go in with the purchase. Mr Skinner got ii- instruction in writing what to do. 'he Council wished to get this purchase omplcted, as the property wa.s likely to ■hauge hands and we would have the aine trouble with the next comer. Now iliat do we find at last meeting:-' Just fen pegs put in the wrong place: io plan.-, nothing prepared. When i sked Ur Skinner «hv it had not been oiv- he said he hadn't any iustrucion 1 -. I said he had. and referred to he clerk's letter-book, which proved 1 *us right. Me said I was very unfair ud was alv. ay.s finding fault. Hut he fid not forget to have ;in account in for onie I.") for this job. which, of course, ias not paid. This is unfair criticism v). "2. Then we come along to Waton's gully. A tunnel was put through her.-, the contract wa-s passed, and the nan l;oI his money. Then we find it .ould not take t h,'> water off Mr Watnn\ land and we had to give him £4 0 lower the tunnel, and this tunnel has ost the ratepayers several pounds ince. This is unfair criticism No. 3. sow about the town side of the Oakura leviation contract. You .say the eonliiclor shifted some of the pegs and as , consequence had to shift more parth '.) make the grade. Now just fancy 1 coiltnicror shifting pegs to give hlltielf more <wirth to >>hi{t, I haven't met hti! contractor yet, You nay this is a jeticr job than wn* specified. J wonder * hat the original specifications w^ro if his job is better. Now, I venture to ay without fear of contradiction that hero are two or throe of the most langei'ous curves in this piece of road if anywhere on the coast ; and I sliudler to think what will be the consequence to anyone meeting a motor-cur >r a five-horse wagon; there will be a terrible accident some day. The fillings, in some places wore not more than Iwonty feet wide; then the side cutlings wore straight up; they should hu\e had a batter of one in one or one in one and a half, with the result that Iho earth has fallen down and hall blocked the road. Xow you, Mr Editor. say that we shall get this £2o that Mr Murray stopped because the job was not done according to specification. Well, if wo do got it, which I doubt very much, that doesn't say that we haven't paid for work that wo never hud done. This is unfair criticism No. •J. Now about the other side of the river contract. Mr Skinner says he had nothing to do with passing it. Surely the Council, when they place a contract in his hands, expect him to se<; it pronerj.v carried out. My opinion is, «nd I nm sure most of the ratepayers share the opinion with mc, that had jiofe Mr Murray enmo along this contract would have been passed, ns the other one wuh, and the Tnpuae tunnel Mas, without taking the other four feet of earth off Hud the Council or the ratepayers would have [icon >u»ne the wiser, this is unfair eritieirmi No, ,1, Xow we come to <lw I'upiue. Why, I ask, waa this tunnel passed when it, wims not don<* to specification within NomeOiiui; Ijke four !'*"' r t t P ut " * ?n<l? n<l £?UM<*Htor Adlam imiKiir for something like six month* to get tins tunnel lowered to its proper depth. We t;ot it carried; a second contract was let, Mhich cost altogether something like £'100, and why, I ask, was this not put down according to specifications? It was something like ten inches or a foot higher than the contract and passed and paid for. This is unfair criticism No. 6. I am <*ottin« tired of writing, but there is one more thing T must mention. Why, when Mr Montefiore was raising the' filling did he go into private property and 'take earth which we had to pay Mr Morris I for, when we had plenty ' of earth of our own close by, and we had to pay for levelling down afterwards. ojVfost of the trouble and litigation over Tapuae was caused through the tunnel not being put down to its proper depth in the first place. This Tapuae job has cost something over £3000, and T ask you

Mr Kdiloi. or ainonc else, do they think we haw u,ot \ alue tor t he money? 1 should not haw »one >n fully into this only that sou liavi- iljur^fl us with unfair cntirKni and animus, for what? Booaust' wr haw darod to rritifiso soino of the engineer's work. — I am, etc., C ANDREWS. Okato, October 21. ['Ilies* 1 matters have been fully threshed out at the, Council meetings wlyre Mr Skinner's actions have been i ndoived. — Kd. Herald.]