TRAMWAYS.

Evening Star, Issue 3862, 10 July 1875, Page 2

TRAMWAYS.

To the Editor.

Sin,—Noticing in your issue of the 7th a letter signed “Justice,” I take the liberty of nuking a few remarks. First, I would ask : will this tramway bo an advantage to the inhabitants of Duncdia and more particularly of Princes street south? I should say most dicidedly it would. Sar.ly a tramway taking over say fifty, sixty, or o o hundred tone of goods twice a day, drawn by horses at a slow ! ace, would bo much les» dangerous than the same quantity of goods taken by horses and drays or waggons, and which would likely bo kept going at all hours of the day. In the one case the whole traffic of say a hundred tons would occupy, perhaps, an hour a day ; iu the other the whole day would scarcely suffice. In the one case the goods would come all the distance by rail without being unloaded at the station; in the other drays would load the goods at the railway station, and cart them a distance of at least half a mile to Anderson and Mowats Can it be possible for anyone to doubt which would be the safer plan of the two? Most decidedly the tramway—to say nothing of the saving to the Government in loading and unloading at the railway station, and to the Corporation in metal for the streets. To avoid accidents, no doubt the Corporation would bind Messrs Anderson and Mowat not to go beyond a certain pac \ Your correspondent “Justice” speaks <uf two accidents which have happened in that part of the town—one caused by a coach and horses, and another by horses, ergo, he assumes that because of these accidents t.ero should be no tramway. I quite agree with “Justice” that the fewer horses we have there will be the fewer accidents ; therefore, one horse pulling twenty or thirty tons by tramway is surely less dangerous than twenty or thirty horses pulling the tamo quantity of goods by drays or waggons. t The real question seems to me to be : is it right of the Corporation to grant to merchants and others such a facility for caixying on their business ? There can be no doubt that every facility granted to merchants in this way is an advantage to the public ; besid s, the Corpora tion have affirmed the principle themselves by granting permUiou to others, andT submit rhat all things being equal if they grant to one they muff grant to anot’u r.

The whole matter lies in a nutshell. There can bn no doubt that it is the duty of the Corpor.ation to grant these tramway crossings t«. any merchant who sees it will be to his advantage to have one, unless his premises happen to bo in such a part of the town, Princes street for instance, from Jetty street to the Octagon, and probably also George street, where it would bo undesirable to have a tramway crossing the street. The street is a chain and a-half wide, and the traffic will no doubt be much reduced as soon as the streets nearer tho harbor are all brought into use. Merchants support the State by paying heavy import duties as well as those taxes imSjsed by the Corporation, and now the Harbor uaul have pub upon them another tax to be expended in improving the harbor. Surely, therefore, they are entitled to every facility of egress and ingiess to their premises, so long as it does not interfere with the existing rights of the general public.—l am, &c , t-, „ , Faikplay. Dunedin, July 10.