CONSTRUCTION OF BOROUGH FOOTPATHS.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXIX, Issue 8373, 6 March 1907, Page 5

CONSTRUCTION OF BOROUGH FOOTPATHS.

DEPUTATION TO THE BOROUGH

COUNCIL,

A deputation, consisting of Messrs J. Cross, J. Graham and C. Graham, waited on the meeting of the Masterton Borough Council, last evening, and presented a letter, dated January 17th, from Mr P. L. Hollings, solicitor, to the Masterton Borough Council, on the subject of the new footpath on the south side of Bannister Street. The letter, which was written on behalf of six property owners, stated that the raising of the footpath on the south side of Bannister street was liable to damage property considerably, and the Council was asked to take steps to remedy the matter. The residents wished to avoid any litigation in the matter, but if the Council did not take steps they would be forced to apply for an injunction. Mr Cross briefly set before the Council the damage to property that was likely to result from of the footpath. Cr Eton wished to know why a letter, dated January 17th and addressed to the Council, had not been presented to the Council before the present time, seeing that the matter was of such importance. It seemed to him that the Council should deal with the letter as a letter to the Council and not from the deputation. Mr Cross said the footpath had not been completed when the letter was written, so no action could then be taken. The footpath was now finished, and he did not think it would inconvenience the Council to deal with the letter at the present time. Mr J. Graham said that the residents were not complaining because their houses were in a hollow. The footpath had been built above their property. There was a drop of eight inches from the footpath to his property, and to fill up his land to the level of the footpath would cost about £4O. Cr Feist considered that the matter required careful consideration, and should be referred to the Works Committee. Cr Morris saw no necessity for a deputation waiting on the Council. If the letter had come direct to the Council it would have been dealt with in the ordinary manner. He considered that it was bad business to bring to the Council at that meeting a letter dated January 17th. Cr Eton said that the deputation already knew that the Council had been served with a claim from Mr G. Heron for compensation for damage to property through the raising of a footpath in Church Street. The question at present under consideration would be governed by the decision in Mr Heron's case. He thought the Council might as well be candid with the deputation, and tell them that their case cannot be considered until after the settlement of Mr Heron's case.

Mr Cross pointed out that they took action in the matter before Mr Heron; they were not following Mr Heron —rather he had followed them. Cr Eton: To-night was the first time we heard of your case. Cr Ewington thought that Cr Eton's suggestion was the right one. Cr Feist (to the deputation): You understand the position now'/ Mr Graham: What we understand is that the Council will not meet us in a conciliatory spirit. Very well, then, we know what to do. Cr Pauling said the deputation admitted that the footpath was finished. They could not be worse off in the future than they were now, so they might as well wait until the case with Mr Heron was settled. Cr Feist moved, and Cr Hoar seconded, that the letter be referred to the Works Committee. Cr Eton ,soved, as an amendment, Ewington seconded, that no action be taken in the matter until Mr Heron's claim is settled. The amendment was carried, and the motion lost, the voting on the amendment being as follows:--Ayes: Ci's Pauling, Temple, Eton, Ewington, McEwen. Noes: Crs Elliott,, Hoar, Morris and Feiat. The deputation then withdrew.