Drains and Culverts. At the June meeting, on the recommendation of the Roads Committee, Mr. Smith’s tender for constructing drainage in Western road, at £77, was accepted.
On the 6th of December, a recommendation having been received from Dr. Blakinson to extend the overflow culvert at the south-west side of Warrior square, it was resolved to defer the consideration of it until the existing culvert had been more fully tried.
The Priory Culvert next received attention in consequence of an application having been received from Mr. George Mills to divert the drain through his ground at the bottom of Havelock road. It turned out to be the large overflow channel through which the water escaped to the sea and which could not be dispensed with. The Board therefore declined to make any alteration.
The Drains & Culvert at Warrior Square. At the December meeting, on the motion of Coun. Neve, it was resolved that the Roads Committee be instructed to take into consideration the ineffectual working of these outlets. Mr. Neve remarked that the drain at Warrior Square was much too small, being only 2ft. 3in, by 1ft. 9in., whilst the drain running into it was much larger. The consequence was that at periods of storm there was an overflow to the detriment of property.
Damage by Flood. On the 5th of July, a letter was read from Wastel Brisco, Esq. complaining of the damage done by the flood to his hop-garden and to a piece of wheat, through some defect in the Local Board pipes. Orders were given that the damage should be surveyed. – On the 6th of December, Coun. Howell asked that the Roads Committee should take into consideration the Priory Valley drains with the view of preventing the overflow of water and the floods in that locality. The Clerk replied that the subject was already under consideration.
Purchase of a fish Shop. On the 1st of February, the committee having charge of the new Fish Market project presented a report in which they stated that the period had now arrived for purchasing Mr. White’s fish-shop, opposite the Custom-house, under the compulsory clauses of the Act of Parliament. They recommended that Mr. White should be offered £200 for it. Astonishment being expressed at the high sum thus named, Coun Howell said that it appeared to him that the offer of such a sum would carry the case with a jury, and White would have to pay heavy costs.
On the second of August the negotiations for the purchase of Mr. White’s fish-shop for £300, with possession on the 1st of September, were confirmed. – On the 6th of September, however, a curious disagreement was made known by a letter which was read from -
