TOLAGO BRIDGE.

Gisborne Times, Volume V, Issue 137, 20 June 1901, Page 4

TOLAGO BRIDGE.

(To the Editor.)

Sir.,—At the public mooting held at Tolago ou Saturday, Mr Macfarlane, while advising the prosecuting with energy of the bridge matter upon specific lines laid down by him. gave, to my mind, threo cogent reasons why the matter should not be proceeded with at this juncture. Hr Macfarlane informed . the meeting that a proposed change in the law during the coming session would probably cause the taking over by the Government of the main roads, and consequently the erecting of such works as the Tolago bridge, and that the County Council bad paused in its proceedings re loan of .£25,000, pending the passing or rejecting of the measure indicated. Mr Macfarlane gave it as his opinion that any special rating power sought to be exercised for the purpose of the bridge can only be properly and lawfully exercised as on the north side of the river, and that if any attempt were made to enlarge to the west or south we should only court disaster; that in the case of any attempt to take in property not primarily benefited by the bridge, the pro posed special district would be liable to revision of boundaries on exemption proceedings being taken, and that owing to their being at present native land, the i’aremata and Mangaheia 2 blocks, though perhaps they would be primarily benefited by a bridge, were at present exempt front special rating. Mr Macfarlane further expressed the opinion that the land around Tolago, which has been the subject of a petition to the Government with a view to its acquirement for close settlement, is unfit for the .purpose for want of draining, which can only bo done by the “ capitalists,” and that the Government experts will report against it on that account. At the same time, Mr Macfarlane advises that the preliminaries re a loan for the half cost of a bridge bo proceeded with, subject, however, to his advice as to the area of the special district. In explanation of why the half of the cost only is mentioned, it may he stated that the convenor of the meeting, Mr Sinclair, stated that he had received from Mr Carroll in Gisborne a “ guarantee ” that the Government will find the other half, also an engineer, free of charge. Without any desire to reflect in any way upon Mr Sinclair, I take leave to amend this as follows : “ That during the coming session of Parliament Mr Cat'roll will do his very best to have placed upon the Estimates such a sum as will by estimation cover the half cost of a bridge, and ,vill also endeavour to obtain authority for

the gratuitous services of a Government engineer, provided the ratepayers find the other half of tho required sum.” It, however, appears to me that for the reasons which arc deductable from Mr Macfarlano’s opinions as above set out, it is inadvisable, if not impossible, to proceed with tho matter at this juncture. So soon, however, as tho Paremata and Mangaheia No. 2 Blochs shall have become specially rateable, I should, other things being favorable, be of a different opinion. As what I have to say anont these two blocks applies to land in other parts of the county and even outside it similarly situated, I will now endeavor to explain, or at any rate review, tho position as I understand it. First, by way of explanation of how I claim the right to discuss tho position of these lands in public print, I may say that by reason of the anomalies connected with them as regards rating, and which I thought had ceased to exist until Mr Macfarlanc stated otherwise. They are a liability and a stumbling block to the ratepayers in that while they use the roads largely, and damage them with large mobs of cattlcj the occupiers contest any claim for rates except native, viz., half general rate, and no special rate. Secondly, tho said lands may be taken to he a part of the security for the State guarantee to the Bank of New Zealand ; and, thirdly, they have been the subject of investigation and public report by a committee of gentlemen of Gisborne. As the Mangaheia 2 block is occupied under lease, and pays full rates, I need only deal with the Paremata. This we gather from records, is held by two trustees, Messrs Carroll and Wi Pore, and occupied by tho Estates Co., tho mortgagees, they say i as “ agents ” for the native owners. From | personal observation, ranging over some I years, I have come to the conclusion that l\. trustee's and the company are at cross pm puses, the trustees being for the pur-pe.-.a of watching and guarding the interests of the native owners by saving and making the equity of redemption of value to them, while on the other hand ' the “ agents,” “ they call themselves,” both by acts of omission and commission, seem to be doing all that is calculated to render its destruction certain and complete. As to what the trustees are doing to prevent this, I am not informed, but they seem to he in accord with the “ agents ” in one thing, and that is that so long as they can escape the block shall pay no rates except native. As to whether the Paremata block would bo benefited by a bridge over the Tolago river, I think thero can bo but one answer, “ yes,” and in so many ways 1 that it is a -waste of space to go into detail upon this, but I may say that at present and for a long time past the township of Tolago has been a market by local con- . sumption for a large portion of the mutton “ other than first-class” which tho block produces, that output being carried on in a manner altogether incompatible with the relationship of “ agents ” and princi- ' pal. Moreover, the peculiar management in every other respect causing, as it must do, a large yearly leakage, is, to my mind inexcusa'blo when we consider that the Estates Company profess to bo “ agents ” only. lam afraid tho County Council have so far done nothing to remedy tho state of things occasioned by this peculiar form of occupation of land. I believe they did watch with some interest tho result of a ease brought by, I ■ believe, the Wairoa Council anont rates upon land similarly situated to this, and which decision was, I believe, adverse to flic Council. On reading something about it, I think I noted that tho evidence, it was held, did not bear out or establish clearly anything more than the relationship of agents for the Native owners, lienee the adverse decision, If, however, the test had been applied to tho Paremata block, a different set of facts would have boon brought out, and tho result different in consequence.. If the Cook County Council have put this matter to any crucial test, the ratepayers hereabouts are unaware of it. It may bo that they have had the advice of their solicitor, but as this “ agency ” appears to bo a question o' fact as well as of law, no lawyer eou’d advise correctly without having the facts, and the only way to got thorn is in open Court. Having, as it were in spite < f myself, a knowledge of the facts relating' o tho occupation of this land by the Estates Company ranging over a period of year.-, I should decidedly say that the term “ agents ” should long ago have been replaced by that of “ mortgagees in possession,” and that failing this the County Council, and any other local body affected should have endeavored to obtain such an amendment of the Eating Acts as would have the effect of making it impossible for such a state of things to exist.—l am, etc., W. F. Hale. Tolago Bay, June 18,1601.