DRAINAGE AT SPREYDON.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2257, 23 May 1881, Page 3

DRAINAGE AT SPREYDON.

A meeting of the ratepayers of Spreydon was held in St. Mary’s schoolroom, Addington, on Saturday evening. There were about thirty present. Mr Geo. Booth, by invitation took tho chair.

The Chairman explained that the meeting had been called for the purpose of giving Mr Tancred an opportunity of explaining his views on drainage matters generally, with especial reference to the rate proposed to he levied on that ward for tho present year. He bespoke for Mr Tancred a patient and considerate hearing. Mr Tancred began his address by explaining that he had come there at the request of certain ratepayers, who complained that the rate of Hid in the £, which it had been suggested should bo levied on the Spreydon and Sydenham districts, was excessive. It appeared to him that the reason why so heavy a rate was imposed on this district was the fact of Spreydon being joined with Sydenham. He thought this a matter for regret, and quite agreed that the complaint of the ratepayers was based on good grounds, seeing that whereas a large amount of expenditure occurred in Sydenham, Spreydon received a very small portion. He quoted figures to show tho relative positions of the respective districts. The valuation of the two districts was £50,366, and that of Spreydon alone only £6OOO. Taking the money already spent, and that proposed to bo expended out of loan on the two districts," they had £28,713 12s Bd, made up in this way Sydenham, £28,637 ; Spreydon, £76 3s. He then gave an approximate estimate of the interest payable, showing that Spreydon was unduly burdened, and drew a comparison between tho expenditure in each district. He quoted at some length from a mass of figures to fully explain their position, and expressed tho opinion that, according to the valuation of and actual value received from tha scheme by the Spreydon district, a rate of 4»d or 5d in the £ was what they ought to pay, and would be amply sufficient to meet their liability estimated on a just and equitable basis.

In answer to questions, Mr Tancred would be prepared to support the separation of the district entirely from Sydenham, and would certainly do his best to oppose the imposition of a rate upon that district of 11 id in the £. He pointed out that with regard to the proposed rate, he could not be held responsible. It was merely a proposal, and had yet to bo discussed, Messrs David Nairn, Ashworth, and others addressed tho meeting, their remarks being generally in disapproval of the action of the Drainage Board, and against the proposed rate and the now Bill.

Mr Nairn proposed—That in the opinion of this meeting Spreydon should he created a district by itself.” Seconded by Mr Petrie and carried.

.Mr Naim also proposed—“ That this meeting is opposed to the now Bill proposed to be introduced by the Christchurch District Drainage Board, and that the member for the district be requested to oppose its passage through Parliament.” A committee to take charge of the above resolutions was appointed. It was also resolved to forward them to the Drainage Board, in the hope that they might be induced to forego the Bill, and that in the meantime a petition against the proposals of the Board in the direction complained should bo drawn up and circulated for signature. The Chairman expressed the opinion that the second resolution was irrelevant and foreign to the intention of the meeting, which was to hear an explanation from Mr Tancred on drainage matters. He thought due notice should have been given to all tho ratepayers of any intention to introduce such a resolution.

This concluded the real business of the meeting, and after a desultory discussion on several matters, the meeting adjourned.