In relation to the progress of the Dock wall project, a communication was presented to the board from the appointed committee responsible for its evaluation. The committee’s recommendation was to proceed with Option No. 2. In response to this, Mr Hilliday suggested that it would be prudent to open a discussion on the matter. He emphasized the importance of hearing the viewpoints of all members involved.
It came to light that both Messrs. John Hayes and J.N. Russell were absent from the committee meeting, leading Mr Hilliday to refrain from forming a definitive opinion in their absence or against the engineer’s suggestions.
A participant known as Mr Long brought up an earlier statement from the engineer, indicating potential unwise aspects of construction. The Mayor intervened, highlighting that the committee had indeed proposed the acceptance of Option No. 2.
Mr Helliday called for the expression of other members’ views on the matter. A member acknowledged that the engineer had thoroughly examined the situation and recommended only a portion for construction.
Mr Power then clarified that no one objected to building on the west wall. Concerns were raised regarding a specific area of the slip that had moved over two feet. The engineer confirmed that this area wouldn’t be touched.
The issue of constructing the wall using timber was debated, with some members expressing doubts. Different schemes were discussed, with their associated costs: No. 1 at £1,367, No. 2 at £1,150, and No. 3 at £667.
Alderman O’Mara inquired about the scope of No. 1, whether it encompassed tearing down the entire wall. The engineer clarified that it did not.
Alderman O’Mara then proposed the adoption of the committee’s recommendation, supporting No. 2 scheme. This proposition was seconded by Mr Long. The Mayor noted that the local society had previously completed stone work to the satisfaction of the engineer and suggested that they should receive the work again. He stressed the urgency, as Christmas was approaching and this work could aid the families of the workers.
Mr Long highlighted the engineer’s endorsement of the society’s previous work, emphasizing that it was both cost-effective and satisfactory. Following further deliberation, it was unanimously agreed, on Alderman O’Mara’s motion and Mr Long’s seconding, to adopt the committee’s recommendation.
The matter of declaring contracts and providing finances was deferred to the next meeting, following a notice of motion from Mr Power.
Electric Connection Proposal: Limerick Steamship and Clyde Shipping Companies
Mr Rossell presented his motion that the facilities of the Limerick Steamship Company and Clyde Shipping Company be illuminated with electricity. The companies would bear the cost of current usage and renewals. Mr Holliday seconded the motion, and it was accepted by the board. The matter was referred to the Engineer for an estimate.
Appointment of Substitute for Harbour Master and Bye Law Adoption
The Harbour Master requested that a substitute be appointed during his absence. On Alderman O’Mara’s motion, it was agreed to appoint Pilot Thomas Mabony as the substitute for the Harbour Master.
The board discussed the completion and amendment of the Port’s bye laws. The Secretary informed that the bye laws were now ready and in the required form. Mr Holliday proposed that the bye laws be printed and circulated among the members for scrutiny before their adoption.
Mr Cudiby conveyed his gratitude to the board for their resolution of condolence following his wife’s passing.
Limerick Echo – Tuesday 21 November 1905
