TRAMWAY MATTERS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 9521, 20 April 1909, Page 1

TRAMWAY MATTERS.

. ♦ " ■ FINANCE AND APPOINTMENTS. THE QUESTION OF MAINTENANCE A long discussion on a variety of subjects concerning tlie Christchurch tramway system was precipitated at yesterday's meeting of the Board by a motion brought' forward by. Mr C. M. Gray, regarding the appointment of Mr C. Cowdery as track engineer and surveyor. Mr Gray moved,— "That the report of the Staff Committee adopted in committee of the Board at its meeting on March 15, in regard to Mr C. Cowdery 5 s appointment, be rescinded." He said that he had raised the point at the previous meeting that the work done in. committee had not been confirmed by the Board. The- chairman (Mr H. Pearce) said that Mri Gray' condoned the Board's action by voting to confirm the minutes of that meeting. Mr Gray said that he had condoned nothing. The minutes did not state that Mr Cowdery had been appointed. Mr J. A. Flesher raised the point that Mr Gray in open* Beard could not give notice to rescind a motion carried in committee. • • : ' .. Mr G. T. Booth also raised the point that the motion was to rescind the report of the Staff Committee, which was adopted by the Board in committee, and the resolution of the Board could not rescind the report of the Staff Committee. . Mr Gray's motion . was ruled out of order, and he was allowed to amend it to read, "that the resolution . of the Board in Committee in which it adopted the report of the Staff Committee -appointing Mr,' Cowdery track engineer be rescinded.?' He said that the appointment was unnecessary, iind it seemed to, him that it was entirely for Mr Cowdery 's benefit. The Board should- have invited applications for the position if it was decided that it. should be filled. Instead of saving money, the appointment would lead the Board into" a lot of expenditure, for Mr Cowdery would have to justify his appointment by v bringing forward a lot of recommendations. The Board had Mr Russell, who. 'was superintending work oh the tracks, and he was, qualified to do the work. The appointment was unnecessary, and the draft of the conditions of the track engineer's, appointment showed that presumably he would do some of the engineer's work. If that was so, his salary should be deducted from that of the engineer. It had been said that there would be a saving, but the Board had that day in a report from Mr Cowdery had a foretaste of what it was likely to get in the way of recomendations, and instead of the track expenditure. being about £5000 a year, it would probably under Mr Cowdery's direction cost about £10,000. Personally, and professionally Mr Cowdery was an excellent man, and the position that ha<l"been mado for him. was, Jnpt good enough for such a man; It wai monstrous tHat • the Board, should go on making appointments, more paiv j ticularly while it was iri its present financial position. Although the Board had had. a splendid year last year, and on paper had available a sum of about £20,000; yetv that sum' was not available. There, was not more than £4000 f7J^^^^^^at,. .there hied, to be -provided depreciat ; ~T., re^ newal and accident and fire insurance funds. Ho earnestly asked that the members should look into the financial position for themselves. He was endeavouring "to get the hang of things," but Tie was surprised to findthat the Board had been spending monej' faster than it was getting it. The Board Miad been, going in for expenditure with a light- and airy, heart, without knowing where the money was to come from. Mr D. Sykes seconded the motion. He said that during the life of the present Board the expenditure on the staff harl increased annually to the extent of nearly £1000. That was a yearly recurring expenditure. He did not object to Mr Cowdery, but he objected to the creation of a new position. The Board should go in for reorganisation, not expansion. ' Mr A. W. Beaven said that after an experience of eighteen months as chairman' he was compelled to say that the appointment was necessary. The Board had saved in the past month , and would save in years to come a very largo sum indeed by it. He would take one instance alone—an \ instance that pirobably led to the appointment — the state of the points and permanent way as a whole. Every, holiday there had been a large number of derailments, and bent axles. That was exceedingly inconvenient for the whole of the public. Last Show Day he had stood at the corner of MoorhouseAvenue and Colombo Street, and had seen four trams go off at the points. That sort of thing had evidently been taking place for some time. He did not reflect on any individual or the staff that existed at the time, but although Mr Russell was a good man, he had 'had no experience ia regard to permanent ways, and those of the tramway required as much upkeep as those of the railways. In the matter of points and crossings , the Christchurch Bystem was going to the bad, and going fairly fast. It was necessary that a man with permanent way experience and time to attend to the matter should be appointed. It was impossible for the engineer or foreman to undertake the work. Half the capital cost was in. pernlanent way, and it was imperative ' that it should be kept in good order. The convenience to the public, especially at holiday times, was. paramount, and members could imagine that half an hour's blockage on a show day might mean the lo6s to the Board of more than Mr Cowdery's whole salary. Mr Gray did not know what he was talking about when he said that the billet had been created for Mr Cowdery. A good man like Mr Cowdery did not require to have billets made for him. In regard to finance, Mr Gray had become mixed up between working expenses and capital account. The Board had a cash balance on working expenses of £4000, but it had made an absolute profit for the year of £6000. It had been good finance, to spend money which they had in hand on capital account with the intention of getting it back whenever they found they could float the money to better advantage than at present. Mr Booth said that on. reading Mr Gray's motion he had -expected to hear something new in the shape of argument regarding the appointment, but instead.it was a rehash of what had been heard in committee. Mr Gray said that that was in committee, but he had wished to have the matter discussed in open board. Mr Booth continuing said that the discussion then was not' to be taken j as a discussion of business men on a ) matter of business but as a matter j brought up merely for the purpose of informing the public of the views of ' certain- members/ apart from the busi-

ness of tho Board. As the public had been taken into Mr Gray's confidence it was therefore necessary .to Bay 'that his statement that the appointment was a "made" one was not only unfair and unjust 'as applying to the members of the Board in committee, but: it was absolutely untrue (hear hear.) Mr Gray must have known it was untrue, and as he could not prove it's truth he was not justified" in making it, especially when it "was made with the intention of going before the public. Mr Gray had said that the condition of the track was not so bad a 6 to justifiy a further appointment, but on the other hand he admitted that the officer in charge of that department was thoroughly capable, and he had given ample evidence that the condition of the track called for urgent attention. It was not in good condition, and was full of defects, and the brief report of Mr Cowdery, after a fortnight's inspection, proved it. Unless it was taken in hand the large expenditure on maintenance, now reaching £5000, might be expected to increase much more rapidly than it would if the tracks were properly •looked after. Considering that the system was not very old, £5000 was a large sum to pay, and if Mr Cowdery had been appointed three years ago the sum might not have been half that of last year, and Mr Cowdery 's salary might. have been saved ten times over. The appointment was not an extravagance. It was quite possible that this year the amount expended on the track might be greater than it would have been if Mr Cowdery had not been appointed, but it would be because track maintenance had not been carried out properly in the past, and it would be with a view to saving money in the future. They had been told that the payments to the staff had increased by £1000 a year, but surely that was not a very remarkable thing. Traffic, mileage, cars and employees — motormen and conductors — had increased, and- it could notbe expected that a rapidly increasing traffic could be carried on by a stationary staff. . "The expenditure on the: staff was not exorbitant, and it was- a-,, remarkable thing that the executive administration of the system was carried on with so email a staff expenditure. Auckland, Wellington and Dunedin spent much more on staff officers. Mr J. Richardson opposed the resolution, and said that neither Mr Gray nor any other member could honestly say that the committee had created a billet for any man. The committee would be foolish to lay itself open to such a charge. He did not think it wise or honest for any member to twit others with the allegations that instead of attending to the interests of the Board, they were wasting money in ! making billets. It was n» credit to a member to express himself in that way. He took strong exception to such a statement being made. Mr Flesher said that the whole matter had been entirely new to him when it came up at the committee meeting, "and he had no idea of creating a billet for anyone. Tho necessities of the situation and the condition of the track had alone weighed with him. Probably some of the worst pieces of track^ were those laid down by the Board itself. Mr Cowdery had carried out the work for the Electrical Construction Company, and the Board's work compared very- unfavourably with his.- . .It,, was basy to see that th© cost of Mr Cowdery's salary would be saved over and over again by his experience, and Mr Gray's remarks were really not worth noticing. Mr Gray surely could not have meant half of what he had said, and in his calmer moments surely would not think of repeating it. . Mr S. A. Staples said that he would vote for the motion, although it had been brought forward in an unfortunate manner. The appointment had been made arid could not be undone, and the discussion had been frivolous and a waste of time. ■ The chairman said that a, good deal of time had been wasted. If a committee consisting of five members of a Board of nine had thoroughly gone into a matter, and recommended a certain course to the Board, there must be some good points about it. Mr Gray, in reply, said that it was natural - that the members who had voted for the appointment should defend their action, and make out as good a case as possible; but the fact remained that an unnecessary appointment had been made. Mr Beaven's admission that the system was going to the bad proved that the Board was not allowing sufficient for depreciation. The balance ne had referred to was not in existence, except on paper. Mr Booth had said that his statement was untrue, but that was only Mr Booth's opinion. It was a significant fact that after Mr Oowdery had finished his job in Wanganui, and^was, walking about in Christchurch, presumably coming in contact with several . members of the Board, they, had awakened to tho fact that "Here is a man; can we not get turn something to do?" His presumptive evidence was as strong as anybody's ou the point. Where had Mr Oowdery got his experience of -track maintenance P He qu estioned,|Mether anybody knew. "$ v ■ ; The chairman said that MrGray was irong in saying that Mr Cowdery had 2ome in contact with members, because probably no nrember knew he was in Dhristcnurch. Mr Beaven said that he had not seen Mr Cowdery, who was in Wanganui «rhen the appointment was made. Mr v Richardson sakl that Mr Cowiery had never seen him on the matter. The motion was lost. Messrs Gray, Staples and Sykes alone voting for it.