MEETING AT ADDINGTON

Press, Volume LX, Issue 11492, 27 January 1903, Page 5

MEETING AT ADDINGTON

RESOLUTION PASSED IN FAVOUR OF THE PROPOSAL.

About sixty Sydenham- and AdJingUm residsnts attended a nueting at til? MabodLst Schoolroom last night. wn*n the Greater Christciiureh qusf-'tion formed the subject for discussion. Tiia Mayor of Sydenham (Mi , J. B- Sim) was in the chair. Taw Chairman tb:it the nueting had bien called by the advocaus of the Greater ChrUtohurch movement, but free discussion on tup part of supporters ajid opponents would be a.low€d The hut thrte Mayors of Christ church had thought that the cuy bounds should b; , fxteixied. ou the ground that, by so doing the district would be muUv> .1 more important une. The city. St. Albans, and Linwood had already decided to amalgamation, and he hoped that Sydenham would cast an impartial vote when the pollh.g day cami- round. Mr H. G. E3., M.H.R., said that the meeting was an absolutely fair and square one, and anybody could speak or ask questions. Tha Sydeniiam petition was promoted by thuse tutit.ed to voti in the boiough, aud nu undue inHueni-e was exercised to induce people to sign the petition. With two ex-vt-ptiuiis the whole of the local shop-keepers took the petitions in and gave every facility ! in tha way of obtaining signatures. The j petition had been readily .supported by the ! .Sydenham people, and tiie fact thut 51/ had signed the petition showed th?:e was a strong dosae on the part, of the people to havd the matter deeiikd at the pol'_*. Two borough councillors had signed the petition. Messrs Hadfitld and JtluMeehan. (Applause). Tlu-re was no truth in tha leport that voters liad been hustled into signing the ]>etition. The question was ons of the greatest importance to the people of the borough. What did it matter whether tne people w<?re under a city or a burough government so long as they got the work dons and the -money spent to their satisfaction, and was there any reason for the argument advanced that the money would not be fairly expended? Hβ took it that Sydenham would €'k»ct only those members sure to look after the interest of the borough. There wmv 24,000 in the three boroughs and 17,000 in the city, therefore thu voting power was to be among the 24,000, and not among the city 17,000. Only four of the present number of city councillors weie living in the city; three weivs living in St. A'lbans, thiee in Linwood, one at Avon.s-ide, and one at Opawa. That showed that Sydenham was likely to have a fair representation, and Sydenham would swe that members of its own would be elected. The city was absolutely locked in by the belts, and the city lands were built" upon to a much greater extent than in the suburbs, in fact nearly all the land had been built upon From 1896 to 1902 the city population had increased by 574, while it "had increased by 2540 m the suburbs. That showed that the voting power would be in the hands of the boroughs. The three boroughs with the city covered 4598 acres and this was not too large an area. Nelson, and even Sumner, had larger areas. It had been said that the Sydten ham rates would be increased as a result, of amalgamation. Mr Hulme said they would not, and he 'had been employed to report on the subject by the Sydenham Borough Council. The revaluation of the

city lands would shortly be completed, and it was estimated that the value would increase from 25 to 50 per cent. Takiuir the increase at only 15 per cent., that would mean an increase in the viiluee of tho oitv lande of over £228,000, and that Mould have the effect of taking the burden of the rates from the shoulders of the boroughs, and placing it on those of the city. Hβ was sure that the reduction in the Sydenham rates would be lese than shown either by Mr Hulme or Mr Gundry Mr Eil then pointed out the advantages to be derived from amalgamation in such departments as the fire brigade service, and a complete road roller system. He concluded by moving—" That in the opinion of this meeting of Sydenham electors it is desirable that Sydenham should join Jn the amalgamation of the city and suburbs to form a Greater Christohurch." Mr G. T. Booth,, who .seconded the motion, said that in the opinion of the sup porters of Greater Chrietchureh the time had arrived when certain large works, such as the Waimnkariri scheme, the tramway system, and a high pressure water supply eyst&n, should be undertaken, l> •was their opinion that it would be impossible to carry out these works with divided districts, and that one central administration would be more economical than several smaller administration*. Dealing with certain objections to the scheme, Mr Booth said that each district would have to bear tho expenditure it had already incurred, while in the future"e!aboi»te work*

in one district would have to be paid for by that district. Further, before any such large work could be carried out, the approval of the ratepayers in that district

would have to be obtained. Both accountants agreed that Sydenham would gain under amalgamation so far as ratee were concerned. Centralised legislation should be more economical and efficient than at present. He did not think the rates would be decreased, but greater efficiency would be obtained for the same money paid oy

the ratepayers. There was little oioubt but that the large general works would be self-supporting, but even if there should be a lose, such loss would be spread over the whole district. He had been a Sydenham man nearly all his life, a.ad if iie thought that Sydenham was going to suffer

[ram the amalgamation, lie would oppose

it to the last, and vote dead against the proposal. Even if a little los« were to

tall upon .Sydenham, with a corresponding gain to the whole of the community, he wae not sure that he would not vote against it. But he did. not think that Sydenham was going to lose anything. The choice to be made by the Sydenham voters on the 4th February was one between progressiveness and stagnation. One thing or the other had to be done—going forward or going back. He had no doubt as to wliat the result of the poll would be. He was satisfied that with the city, St. Albam, Linwood. and Sydenham co-operating the result would be assured. (Loud applause.) Mr A. R. Morrwon, who spoke ra favour of the motion, pointed out some ot

the advantages that would accrue in respect of the efficient carrying out of large works under the Greater Christchurch system. No scheme had been proposed that would work better and with less friction than tne Greater Christchurch scheme. There wae no doubt but that Sydenham would receive fair treatment under" the scheme. Hβ did not think the arguments of the Sydenham Council were sufficient to prevent the people from giving a solid vote cm the question. The smalhiaM of tlie number of , Sydenham representatives would prove a blessing in disguise, for it would probably lead to a quickening of municipal interest on the part of the people. In reply to a question, Mr Morrison said it did not matter to Sydenham what the city overdraft wae, for Sydenham would not have to pay it under amalgamation. Mr N. K. Bowden said that the Greater Christchurch proposal originated, from Christchurch itself. If the ratepayer were not satisfied with the manner in which things were being carried on, then it rested j with them to make a change. In hie opinion Sydenham would have to contribute towards the liquidating of the city overdraft. He advised the ef,eet<Jrs "to think for themselves, and vote according to their convictione. What they iiad heard that night wae purely supposition, and no figures had been supplied. Cr. Forrester eaid that he had been chairman of the Sydenham Finance Committee for several years, and- lie had, therefore, ©aneidered it his duty to explain tihe diffeawnoe between t'}»e report* of tiie two accountudiis. Mr Gundiry had stated that with iuma%aina.tion a saving of some £300 in salaries for cCerkal wurk, etc., would be effected, but lii* idea was that tliere would be an foereaee of nearly £900. The rate to be struck in Sydenham nest year would *>c 2 21-oltiid, aad not 3 31-64thd as it had been ia the paat year, for certain, expenditure during that *ye*r would not be repeated. Mr don* 2u» Iml

best to bulst«r up the oity and »o belittle Sydenham. fOrtce cf """Queetion. 7 ') li Sydenham wae to be mode partly responsible for the iiitiic*! on the dsstnictor loau, would the city tv pi-.-jxtied to pay pail of the itittivft on the Sydenham w;vter supply ioan? It. would hiive been much better to nave all these disputed matters eettWd befotc the day.

M;- S. iMl'x-lific* said that Mr Bowdrn could nrn, object to the voters discussing the qu.s-tion. when the Couiuyl, of which he wr.s a mfuib-T. had wnt out n circular on the matter. Tlie promt Sydenham nr.aiicipa. bui'xiings could hi us>ed a.< a- l.xa! hail and a public library. (Appl.uiK'.) He felt confident that *th* Sydenham councr". had done its b.?st, and that if Sydenham had

four n?p:**ent(U:vea on tlf3 central coancu th#y wnuld have good men on an cnicunt council. (Applause.) Cr. K. Jones said the Council had determined that the ratepayers should deckle the question at fclx? pod." Tht're h«d b*«n desperate ■efforts mude to have the matter settled without allowiiig the peopie au oppottunjty of going to the poll, and an Act had been passed :i lowing the Council to hand over the borough to the city. Further, by another Act power was given to the Gov-tmor-in-Council to join Sydenham with the city. Not ena member of the City Council was living in Sydenham. He considered the Gi-ea.tei- area was too small, and some of thw- great works referral to coiLd be carried out without touching districts not included in the Greater Cnristchmvh district. Sydenham, he said, would lose, under auiulgajntttion, 5 16-64thd in the £1 in respect, of the value of the reserves. It would have been far better if conferences had btfen held between the City Council and each of the borough councils separately, when matters in dispute could have been settled before poCle were taken. Mr Lafferty said lie did not oppose Greater Christchuich, but he wanted the amalgamation to be fflnde on fair terms. He advised the eltt-iors to make their conditions, and know where they were, and then vote for Greater Christcburch.

After Mr EU had replied, the motion was put, and carried with five dissentients.