AKAROA AND WAINUI ROAD BOARD.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume VI, Issue 554, 4 November 1881, Page 2

AKAROA AND WAINUI ROAD BOARD.

To the Editor

Sir, —Mr Clnppell, in his letter which you kindly published in the Mail of the I Ist instant, tries to overlook my request to the Coiinty Council to complete a line of road which his Board is unabie or un- [ willing to do, and, evidently wanting to make other portions of the district jealous of f-ivored Wainui, enumerates several bay-* in a more dismal state as regards nuicln than Wainui, and actually goes into figures to show how Wainni hius " robbed " the rest of the district, and has the temerity !o state that I know this as well as he ■■iocs. Sir. I knov tnorj than this, which I will charitably suppose Mr Ghappell i.< ignorant of, namely, that the greater portion of .the money he quotes as having been spent in Wainui was provided by a special grant of £2000 voted by the Provincial Government for the extension of the Wainui road, and had nothing whatever to do with the Road Board's ordinary grant. The Eoad Board grant would not have been sixpence largerif no special one had been made. This giant was given in answer to a petition sent to Uie Government by the settlers on the western side of the harbor, so that now, according to Mr Ciiappell's own showing, when the special grant is deducted, the balance spent in Wainui out of Road Board funds h not so enormous. Unfortunately the Board is so well known that we are not surprised at its action in declining to take steps to mako the road passable over Rhodes's Fiat, although when the settlers withdrew all opposition to the old road being closed, it was on a distinct promise from the Board that it would spond £250 on the new road and £250 on the Wuinui P.iss road. My letter to tho County Council, which Mr C. has been good enough to notice and tike exception to as regards Barrett's trespass, was in reply to one from the Road Board to tho Council, in which it denied any trespass, because it had paid Mr McKay £9 for allowing people to go through iiia land. Of course if McKay had to be paid Barrett could stop trespassers, as tno largest portion of the road went through Bnnetl's land, but since then it appears from Mr Ciiappell's letter that the Board li'is completed the purchase of the ruad, for he says, " The public are in possession ol : tho new rond." This is sorry comfort, for the new road not even passable as a bridle-track. It is something akin to .saying a man is a good scholar because ho has a gooJ pen, but has to get tho schoolmaster at the side school to write his letters for him. Wo shall now see what moral obligation the Board attaches to it- ;-i-oniiso to spend £250 on the new ~j ~,) V^....... A. C. KYtGRT, Tcl--iU'.. Bsrrv'aTJay. N P ov. 3. : '