THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 1880.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1926, 27 April 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, APRIL 27, 1880.

The tramway question has now assumed a new phase, and one which we conceive will somewhat startle the ratepayers. At the meeting of the City Council last night a letter was read from the Chairman of Directors, intimating the intention of the company to take the line of tramway along High and Manchester streets to the railway station. At first sight this does appear to be very alarming, and the members of the City Coucil listened to it as merely a formal document. But when the Minister for Public Works—we beg his pardon, chairman of the Works Committee—Cr. Gapes rose and in his usual fluent and lucid manner explained the bearing of this notice on the pockets of the ratepayers, then there was a change. It now appears that to enable the line of tramway to be laid along High street without absolute danger, when the cars are running, to the citizens an expenditure of from £BOO to £IOOO will be required. “Who,” asked one of the Councillors of the chairman of Works, “is to pay for this?” “ Oh,” was the reply, “ the ratepayers, of course.” No wonder on such a state of things, that Councillor Hulbert indignantly protested against the rates of the city being expended in this reckless manner to promote the interests of a private company. Is it not enough that the right to run over our streets for a long term of years has been conceded to the Company ? Now, not satisfied with this, and not only desiring to break up and, to some extent at least, injure one of the best made streets in the city, this company coolly proposes to mulct the already impoverished city treasury by £IOOO to make the street safe whilst the cars are running for the private profit of the company. It has often been said that in respect to matters affecting them municipally or politically, the people of Christchurch are the most apathetic of any city in Now Zealand, but this proposal ought to startle them out of this apathy. Wo cannot do important and necessary works which are urgently needed for the health and comfort of the citizens because the cry is raised of “no funds,” and yet we are told that we must find this large sum of money to help to swell the dividends of a private company. In the name of the ratepayers we protest most thoroughly against any such thing being done. We have nothing to say as regards the privilege granted of using the streets, but should by any chance the agreement entered into by tho late Council hind the ratepayers to defray the cost of a work such as this (a state of affairs wo cannot believe to bo possible) then tho Council did not do its duty to the city.

Councillor Hulbeet is to ho congratulated on having persevered in respect to the Latimer square improvement question until he has at last been successful. As we have before pointed out the present state of that square is a disgrace to the city, and without wishing to expend money now in mere ornamentation, we consider it the duty of the Council to keep that square in order equally with any other thoroughfare im the city. The work now authorised to be done will only put the square in a fairly decent condition. With regard to Cranmer square, whilst admiring the fine sense of justice and impartiality displayed by those members of the Council who wished to see both squares dealt with equally, we would point out that, as stated by Councillor Hulbert, this would deprive the Football Clubs of their only ground. The necessity for a recreation ground, pure and simple also is not so great at the west as at the east' end of the city. The former has the Domain, the gardens, &c., so that really they can better afford to allow Cranmer square to he devoted to football than the eastern residents can give up Latimer square. It seems to us therefore clear that the carrying out of any work in connection with Cranmer square can well afford to stand over for a while, and that the money at the disposal of the Council for improvements should be expended on Latimer square, it being the sole recreation ground for a very large and thickly populated area. Whilst on such subjects wo may congratulate the Council upon the very handsome structure designed by one of their number for the clock tower. This, as will he seen by notice of motion, given by Or. Lambert, it is proposed to place on the South Belt, near the Railway Station. The site selected is, we think, one admirably fitted for the purpose. Beyond this also, Or. Lambert’s proposition has this merit, that the city rates will not suffer. Tho erection by the Council of the tower, on the site proposed, is mads contingent on the public subscribing the estimated cost. Whether they will do so or not remains to be seen, but of the suitability of the site, as chosen, there can be no doubt.

Once more the City Council and Sydenham Council will meet in Conference over the South Town Belt. This time, however, their deliberations are to be assisted by the wisdom of the members for the city. In view of the approaching winter and the fearful state of the Belt during last year, it is to be devoutly hoped that the accession of new blood to the deputations may lead to an amicable settlement. We feel sure that both the citizens and the ratepayers of Sydenham would be glad if by some mutual concessions this vexed question could be set at rest.