THE TRAMWAYS CONTROVERSY.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXV, Issue 10317, 28 January 1927, Page 6

THE TRAMWAYS CONTROVERSY.

(To The Editor.) Sir,—Allow me to congratulate your journal upon being a trier and I should judge that you favour my motto “Better to have tried and failed than never tried at all.” I notice that you unconsciously admit that the tram system has not failed but the administration has failed. This was in reply to my query “Has tlie' system failed in its authorised object S'” Yon have certainly done better on the “loss” query but unfortunately, the borough solicitors and myself interpret the Tramways Act to mean that lack of funds shall not be considered as a means beyond Control. I suppose the law means what is- printed. Since the unanimous decision of our council to accept Cr. De C'osta’s motion to continue indefinitely, I do think it would be unwise to defer consideration of a substitute until the validity of the poll is decided. I have only arrived at that conclusion after hearing Cr. Burnnrd’s explanation for his supporting the motion. His remarks included the fact that the Appeal Court would not be adjudicating until April next and no decision could be received before May next. Therefore, the present council would be out of office and the special Tramways Committee would be automatically extinct. The incoming council may be prepared to deal with this question in a manner more acceptable to the public as well as to the ratepavers. Thanking .you for being so liberal in the space you have allotted to me during this controversy,—l am, yours, SAM J. PEARSON, (“DUMMY MATE.”)