Residents hot over water issue
Today in Hamilton water shortages inform controls upon sprinkler use. One hundred and twenty years ago, the uses to which H20 could be put was also a contentious issue in the town’s central business district.
In the early days of the 20th century Victoria St was dusty and unpaved. In summer, it was the practice to water it. The frequency with which this task was carried out was the subject of much debate.
In November of 1903, an indignant T.W. Maunder wrote to the Waikato Times, demanding to know who was responsible for the failure to water Victoria St the previous Monday and Tuesday. The resulting dust, he suggested ‘‘was something disgusting’’.
Given Hamilton had secured its own water supply, Maunder was of the opinion that ratepayers should insist on daily watering rather than leaving to the town’s Turncock ‘‘to do as often or as seldom as he likes’’.
Two months later, another correspondent accused the Borough Council of favouring hotel frontages in their watering, ‘‘which is done in front of some places and not in others’’. If ratepayers were footing the bill, he argued, watering needed to be consistently carried out.
In April of 1904, a third complainant put the blame squarely on the Borough Council’s Waterworks Committee for its failure to supply the official, Turncock, with either the equipment or the discretion to combat street dust.
The official needed a ‘‘12ft length of light hose’’ and the power to be reactive.
The Waikato Times confirmed this assessment, stating that Turncock only acted at the behest of the committee chair.
A month later, still another correspondent addressed himself to the broader picture, finding it unacceptable ‘‘that any town of this size’’ continued to feature ‘‘rough sandy shingle to trudge through’’. ‘‘One would think tar was not procurable at any cost’’, he stated, pointing out that Cambridge enjoyed sealed footpaths.
The ‘‘clouds of dust we have to continually put with up’’ had not abated, despite numerous protests about the infrequency of street watering.
In November of 1904, the Waterworks Committee decided against relieving the Turncock of watering responsibilities, ensuring the issue remained contentious for some years to come.