of nine feet beyond the sea wall. The parade to retain its present width and the adjacent road to be widened. They did not advise any immediate removal of the Old Warm Baths. The estimated expense of the alterations was £1700. Coun. Harvey favoured the recommendation, remarking that by widening the road which flanked the parade, George Street would be relieved of the superabundant traffic, and a good piece of road would also be obtained on the site of the Old Warm Baths when they were removed. He moved the adoption of the report. Coun. Ross seconded and hoped the mover would not say such naughty words about him again after that. (Laughter) Coun. Burfield quite agreed with the recommendation, it being of immense importance to have a wider road leading from the site of the old Battery to the Pelham Baths. Coun. Williams and Coun. Tree opposed the scheme. Ald. Scrivens had no personal interest to gratify in upholding the report, although the proposed improvement would cover a space of ground towards the purchase of which he had contributed two hundred guineas out of two thousand, and he might say the same for Mr. Crake. Motion carried.
Removal of Rocks. While speaking in support of the previous recommendation, Coun. Ginner suggested the removal of the Pier Rocks, which he said were a great nuisance to the Stade, as was evidenced on the previous Saturday. They would do to build the wall with, and if taken away the East groyne would have full scope to act. Beach would accumulate, and there would be room left in front of the sea wall even when extended seaward for the pleasure boats and machines. At that time and even now, Mr. Ginner would be considered as holding erroneous views respecting the removal of the Pier rocks, but since his day the great difficulty and expense that has accrued in the protection of property at that spot and in repairing the many beaches of the sea-wall thereat ought to have convinced successive Town Councillors that they were a bane rather than a boon to the town. It was the opinion, half a century ago, of the late Mr. Bowerbank, a St. Leonards geologist, that all foreshore rocks helped rather than hindered the flow of the sea, and this view coincides with that of the present writer, who has watched the tidal action for at least seventy years. He did not at first think that Mr. Ginner’s and Dr. Bowerbank’s views were practically correct, but his many observations since have convinced him that the onshore rocks are a danger, and in no way a protection. There are several persons who can attest the long-ago statement of the writer that if ever the Pier rocks (which have wrecked many a boat) disappear in a natural way, it will only be after other parts of the foreshore are well covered with shingle. Look at the coast all along and it will be seen that where there is most rock, there is less beach. Not only would the removal -
