PROPOSED SALEYARDS AT WAVERLEY.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume LX, Issue 17061, 14 August 1917, Page 6

PROPOSED SALEYARDS AT WAVERLEY.

>■ SITE CONDEMNED BY HEALTH

INSPECTOR

DISCUSSED BY HOSPITAL BOARD

INSPECTOR'S ACTION CRITICISED

1 ' (From our Travelling Reporter.)

At the meeting of the Patea Hospital Boai-a yesterday, discussion ensued over the report of the Health Inspector ■in regard to the proposed saleyards at Waverlsv, and some frank expressions of opinion were voiced. The Health In- , spector (Mr Gray) reported as follows: " "I beg to report having, in company with members of, and at the request of, the Waverley Town Board, inspected a proposed site for the above-mentioned kaleyards. Attached is a plan of part of the town of Waverley, showing two existing saieyards and tiie proposed site for saleyards. The proposed section js nearly flat 3 any fall that is in it is towards the recreation ground. It is an Education Reserve, and the Waver* ley School Committee expected that a .new schcol would be built on it soon; tkeir present one behig an old building. The land on which the saleyards next to the proposed site are, belongs to the Town Board, and the lease has live years to run. The Town Board will not grant a renewal of the lease ' for saleyards. Jackson's saleyards have been in existence for probably nearly fifty years, and the town has grown around them. The Town Board and the residents object to any more atleyards being established in the town. There are no Town Board by-laws. I interviewed the manager of the New Zealand Farmers' Co-operative' Coy., Ltd.. which company purpose establishing the saleyards, and he stated that 'file company were negotiating for, and ' fully expected to get, the section in Question, and that they would obtain the best legal advice about establishing the saleyards on the proposed site. I' do not think it advisable to have saleyards abutting on, and probably draining into, the town recreation ground. Probably you could bring the establishment of saleyards on proposed Kite into tihe schedule of offensive trades, and, if not, I beg to recommend that the company be requested to look for a suitable site outside the town d:stnct." -'- Mr Belton said he considered that tho inspector had been the dupe of some .of those concerned, and a protest should be sent to the "Department m respect to the absurd attitude adopted. If the Department inquired into matters it would probably be seen that ! the inspector had been used as a lever. ji. .Mr Dunn (Waverley) strongly pro- - tested against Mr Belton's insinuations, TPirbieh were neither fair nor just, and were quite uncalled for. The proposed saleyard site was in a residential part q£ the town, and ratepayers had a , perfect right to object to the erection 7 of stock paleyards, which might become I a.nuisance, and a menace to the health i of those living adjacent. ! ( -* A Mr Dickie maintained the same atfcij tude as that adopted ■by Mr B.elton, and he contended that public inte'r;c.sj;s were not at all. He concurred with Mr Belton that a proi"test should be sent to the Department . against the allegedly absurd and *n'consistent attitude adopted by the Inepector. l H Mr Greeger said ho was astonished at the remarks made by Messrs Belton and Dickie. Because the Inspector, in response to a demand from the Department to furnish a report, had done so in a manner adverse to the way they liked, these members came to the Board meeting" and imputed wrong motives altogether. To suggest that the Inspector was the dupe of some-body was * quite unjustifiable. ,\'Mr Belton: He has made a report which he cannot prove. , J~ Mr Greeger moved that the report be received. • '- -Mr Belton, who again suggested that the Health Department had been used as a lever to block the yards, moved as'-an amendment that a protest agjjjnst thp report be forwarded to the authorities, and that the Health Doy partment be asked to investigate the (position of other saleyards at Waverley. '.The Chairman pointed out that tho Board would be placing itself in a rather rinvidious position if it carried a resolajion of protest as proposed. It was the dtity of the Board rather to assi-st a qualUied health oflicer in the performance ot his duties. He was sure that a Report fioin the Inspector would overnue the private views ot Board members.

,!."Mr Boltoni.The Inspector should bo 1 consistentj and report also on the other "Sards. • .. Mr Greeger : That's nonsense. He was not asked to report on the others. The Inspector was requested to report on the proposed site. He has done so, ~und it is our duty to support him, "iq. the interests of the health of the comni unity, as against th© interests of the company. At'ter further discussion the amendment was lost and the motion carried.