WAIPAWA COUNTY COUNCIL.

Waipawa Mail, Volume 2, Issue 137, 3 January 1880, Page 3

WAIPAWA COUNTY COUNCIL.

The usual monthly meeting of the Council was held in the Courthouse, "Waipawa, on Friday, the 2nd January. Present Lieut.-Colonel Herrick (Chairman), Messrs Mackerscy, Levy, Johnston, Rathbone, Smith, Dillon, and Sowry. The minutes of the previous meeting were read and confirmed. Outward and inward correspondence read. Mr Smith drew the attention of the Council to the fact that Mr Sowry’s seat was vacant owing to his insolvency

Mr Mackersey said that if a man made private arrangement with his creditors, it did not necessarily mean insolvency. Creditors might give time, and in that case the estate might realise 20s. in the £, or even more. It was too hard altogether to declare a man insolvent before he was proved to be so.

Mr Smith said that a meeting was actually held, at which Mr Sowry declared himself insolvent.

Mr Mackersey said that no public notification was given of the matter, and therefore it was for the Council to consider him solvent so far as they were concerned.

Mr Rathbone agreed with the last speaker. Mr Levy also spoke in similar terms as Mr Rathbone.

Mr Mackersey moved that the ordinary business of the Council be proceeded with. Mr Smith moved as an amendment that the Council take the advice of their Solicitor whether or not a Councillor having called a private meeting of his creditors and offered composition, his seat in the Council ffhould be considered vacant. Mr Johnston seconded the amendment. The Chairman also agreed with the amendment. Mr Mackersey said that they were not called upon to hunt up the private affairs of any member of the Council. They should wait for public notification as to the matter. Mr Sowry said there was no truth in the statement made by Mr Smith that he (Sowry) offered composition to his creditors. The amendment was put to the meeting and carried. The following correspondence was then dealt with : From Mr. Clark, Tamumu, com- : he was misled by the fc calling tenders for a the Tamumu-Pourerere \ ' tig was said iti the adabout conditions, and when he perused the specifications, he inadvertantly overlooked the conditions attached. From the County Engineer, stating that Mr Clark had no grounds of complaint. From W. Hall, Tikokino, stating that he had no road to his property, and that he daily ran the risk of being prosecuted for trespass. He forwarded a letter from Mr Bryson, which forbade him (HaH) to go through his (Bryson's) ground. On the motion of Mr Rathbone, it was agreed to refer the matter to the Engineer. From the Chairman of the North Ruataniwha Road Board, requesting that an alteiation be made in the rate ’•oil in favor of Messrs Weeks and Burgess, they having lodged objections against the Board’s valuation, but did not get the reduction to which they were entitled, owing to a mistake committed when the eorrectiors were made by the Judge of the Assessment Court. No decision was Arrived at.

Fnm Mr Gwymuth, offering his services as County Engineer on the same terms as expressed in a previous applicaton, if Mr Blackbourn should resign

Fron Mr Smith, Hon. Sec. to Napier Hospital Committee, stating that om patient only from AFaipawa County-vas admitted into tho hospital on the >rder of a member of the Council;and that the rest were taken by Dr Sp»ncer and himself. The letter also contaned a request for the payment of a* account for these patients.

Mr Johi=iton said that a resolution of the Comty was sent to the Napier Hospital Cmmittee to the effect that the Councilwould not be responsible for any but >atients received through an order, lo also drew attention to the fact tha the Government paid half the cot of patients in the Napier Hosp al, but that the committee cliimecthe full amount. Mr Mackersy moved that the sum for the pitien received by order be paid, but lot fo the others. t’eeondel by Jr Levy, and carried. From IX r Tepy, Kopua, stating that he could koc» the child Castle no 1 inger. It was resolved hat provisions be made for chil? t Mr Levy to sec about the A petition was eceived from the Small Farm Woodville, requesting a in the road to tho settlement, and lowing the advantages of the propose line over that which is now in use. A letter was read t 0 m Air Twely, eeretary of the Vic, r ia Block Asxsiation, objecting t* the report of ngineer on the road i question* and *pporting the petition Mr Smith spoke st> n£ r]v, an! at considerable length, in ipport of the pcition. Ho said thatho best jfcroot’ leaver of it. was tl i ownM s G f ** a-ion*-', in the -'lock I r 'vsed pay *3O towards the vxpena 0 f ntklng

the road. It would require £3OO to make the surveyed line a good road, whereas £IOO would be suffeient for the line proposed. The owners of the land were bound to occupy it on July next, and they were therefore entitled to have a road to their places.

Mr Sowry opposed the petition. He said that the local body also were against it, and that he met no one in Woodville in favor of it but one man. He believed that three-fourths of the petitioners never saw the land. Mr Rathbone said that one-third only of the people interested were in favor of it, and further, that the road had to be opened through the Public Works Act, which required a meeting of ratepayers, the matter to be decided by a majority of them. Mr Johnston said that the power of laying off the roads was in the hands of Mr Baker, Chief Surveyor.

Mr Smith replied that some people in the township of Woodville, wanted to keep the old road open, merely to take the people to the township, but the people themselves wanted to get to tha main road, after which they could go where they liked. Mr Levy moved that the petitioners be recommended to have a meeting and send their resolution to the Crown Lands Office, after which the Council could deal with the matter.

The motion was seconded by Mr Mackersey and carried.

A petition was read from other settlers in Woodville, praying that a sum of money be spent on the Pinfold road. The petition largely expatiated on the subject of the request. Mr Sowry supported the petition, but several members spoke against it. He (Sowry) moved that £l5O be spent on it. The amount being reduced to £IOO, the motion was carried.

Mr Mackersey objected to a charge of royalty for the metal used on the Waipukurau road. Mr Smith agreed that the price per yard was high, but that it was done by private arrangement, with the consent of the Council.

Mr Dillon asked why did not the Engineer lay off the roads betw r een Waipukuru and Tamumu, and another road through the Homewood estate, according to motions passed at previous meetings.

Several members having spoken against the question, Mr Dillon spoke in reply, and warned the Council that the question as to the road through the Homewood estate was no longer to be

ignored. Mr Johnston moved that Air Roclifort he communicated with as to what he would charge for certain surveys for the Council.

The motion was seconded by Air Smith, and carried.

Air Smith drew attention to a portion of the Waipawa—Waipukurau road oil which a sum of money was spent, but the work, he said, was not completed. He moved that the road overseer be instructod to ascertain the cost of completing the work, and report at next meeting. The motion was seconded by Air Rathbone, and carried. Air Smith "moved that the road overseer be instructed to employ no more labor on the Waipukurau Gorge than is necessary to remove land slips. The motion was seconded by Air Johnston, and carried. The following letter was read from the County Engineer : Waipawa, Dec. 5, 1879. Col. J. L, Hkrrick, Chairman Waipawa County Council. Sir, —The Council at the meeting yesterday, neglected to inform me the result of the discussion on the account I presented for work done on Road Board roads, being a claim of £34 10s Od ; also their decision, “ that no alteration be made in the Engineer’s department at present.” That omission prevented me from explaining to the Council my views on these matters, I having to retire whilst these subjects were being discussed. As to the first (the account), I cannot withdraw it, the County Council having interfered with the agreement they made with me. As to the second, the County Council will have on the last of this month broken that agreement. I therefore hold myself at liberty to take what action I may be advised. The resolution also passed, that I at once obtain the Surveyor’s certificate, I most decidedly refuse to carry out until further arrangements are made between the County Council and myself. I should not be remaining in the district, and such | certificate would be of no service to me, and it would be a waste of time preparing the necessary surveys, &c., required before the same could be granted—l have, Sir, the honor to be, your obedient servant,

John Blackbourn, County Engineer. The Council went into committee to consider the Engineer’s letter. Relative to the letter received from the Engineer enclosing an account for £34 14s, it was moved by Mr Mackersey, and seconded by Mr Rathbone, that this Council sees no cause to alter the decision arrived at last meeting of the Council. —Carried. It was moved by Mr Johnston, and seconded by Mr Rathbone, that this Council is quite unable to agree with the County Engineer that it has broken faith with him regarding Road Board works—Carried. It was moved by Mr Mackersey, and seconded by Mr Smith, that the County Engineer, having by hia letter of tho sth of December last refused out the wishes of this Council" to become a certificated surveyor, he dismissed at once.—Carried. ) Pressure on our spade prevents us from i inerting the Buj^^^’jireport..