WAIHOU RIVER FERRIES.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXVII, Issue 4958, 31 March 1926, Page 2

WAIHOU RIVER FERRIES.

DEPUTATIONS’TO COUNCIL.

NETHERTON OR WHAREPOA.

The afternoon of Monday’s meeting of the Hauraki Plains County Council was given over to deputations for the Netherton ferry and algo for and against the Wharepoa ferry. The first deputation comprised Messrs V. Young, J. Young, Geo. Death, and J. A. Reid, settlers of Netherton, who waited upon the council to urge the early re-opening of the. Netherton ferry.

Mr J. Young said that he was a ratepayer df the Netherton and Turua. ridings, of the Hauraki Plains County and the Ohinemuri County. He considered it was of vitall importance to keep the Netherton ferry open. The Hikutaia sale was the leading sale in the valley, but if the ferry was to be closed the sale would be ruined. In regard to the Wharepoa, ferry he would point out that the agitation to have it kept ope<n was not from Hikutaia. He would suggest that the Plains County sell its share of. the Wharepoa ferry to the settlers who desired it kept open. Mr V; Young endorsed his brother’s remarks, and pointed out that the Netherton ferry was used by children who attended ’the school over the river.

Mr J. A. Reid also sjpoke of the necessity of- reopening the Netherton ferry for the purpose of driving stock to Hikutaja. He pointed out that the river was narrower there than at Wharepoa, and the road opened up served more country than the Wharepoa route.

Cr. J. C. Miller sajd that the matter had received much consideration by the council. It had considered that it was too expensive to keep two ferries. going. The opinion was that two ferries’ were not warranted. A conference had been held with the Thames County, and that county had said that the matter would be left to .the Plains County, but that it w.ould have, to maintain the roads on both sides. Since then the Thames, Cpunty had ■ sajd that its decision would be delayed tor a month. The Council considered the Netherton ferry the one that should be maintained, and had decided, provided an arrangement was .arrived at between the .two county councils east of the river, to shift the Wharepoa pontoon to Netherton. Had the other tiro bodies agreed the. Netherton ferry would now be running.

In reply to Cr. Madgwick, Mr J. Young said that he was sure the majority of Plains settlers preferred the Netherton ferry. It was. practically. no further for settlers of the northern parts of the Plains to use .the Netherton ferry, but it made a, great difference to settlers of the southern parts: of the Plains. Cr. McLoughlin said that the deputation would be doing better work by approaching the ? Thames,;,and Ohinemuri County Coun'cils. The Plains County had done its utmost to get the Netherton ferry gojng.

Cr/ Hare said that the Ohinemuri County was doing its' utmost ,to get the' ferry going, but as a result of some agitation the Thames County had refused to negotiate im'regard to its. proportion of the ferry plant. • The chairman said that the loss <>n the. Wharepoa ferry had been £l2O odd, £440 odd, and £75 odd during the past'.three year"; while the loss on the Netherton 'ferry was £46 odd, £94 odd, and £9l odd. Councillors argued that these figures included capital expenditure.

Cr. Hayward suggested forwarding a resolution to the Thames County Council urging it to expedite the negotiations. so that the ferry at Ne,the.rton could be reopened as, early as possible. While supporting the idea members advocated deferring a motion on the lines suggested by. Cr. Hayward until the deputation from Wharepoa, which, was waiting, was heard.. , Cr. Nicholson said that the Whare-poa,-settlers had. contributed £320, and some months ago they had signed a petition protesting against the action of the Thames County in supporting the closing of the ferry. This petition had apparently not reached the Thames County.

After the chairman had corrected his statements as to the losses on the two Terries, which during the past three years had been £538 3s 8d for Wharepoa and £232 8s for Netherton, Cr. Madgwick said that a matter .that should carry more weight Was the maintenance, of trie ferry approach roads. Apparently the Plains County had to maintain the roads on both sides of the river. f It was decided, on the. motion of Ors. Hare and Harris, that the Olffnemuri County Council be,ai\ke.d what steps were being taken in 'regard? to securing a pontoon for Netherton and what was the result of the conference with the Thames County Council. WHAREPOA SUPPORTERS. A deputation from the Wharepoa and Puiiri ridings of the, Thames County waited upon the council, to protest against the closing of the Wharepoa ferry. Mr Elliot, the spokesman, said that the settlers had contributed towards, the ferry. A petition signed bythreequarters of the settlers of . the district hqd reached the Thames, County office, despite the statement off the Thames Council that it had not arrived. It was understood .that the Thames; County would agree to the ferry being maintained if the road maintenance could be made a charge on the whole county. He would urge the Plains County ,to adopt the sa ; me course.

Mr Winder, the next speaker, dwelt on the advantage of the Wharepoa ferry to the Plains County. It was the hea,vy traffic of the Plains that caused the, heavy maintenance on the approach roads. He contended that the traffic at present was ten times as great as it w.aa a couple of years ago, and that it would Increase, in the future. When the railway was across the Plains the Kerepeehi station would be the nea.re.st for the settlers, east df the river. . Mr Darrow spoke of the necessity of the. ferry to those settlers, who owned land bn both sides of the river,

as many of them did. He urged that the appprbach .roads be made a county matter by both councils. In reply the chairman said that at the conference > with the Thames County the Pteins Council ha.d said that it desired the, ferry closed. The Thames County had insinuated .that if the Plains County desired the terry would- have to maintain the Wharepoa read. He did not think there was any chance of either county making the approach roads a, charge on the County Fund. There had been a loiss on the two ferries during the last three years of £764-odd. He asked if the settlers would entertain the idea of buying the council’s share of the plant.

Cr. Mayn said that the Thames County had stated .that its settlers hqd not offered any objection to the closing of the terry.

Mr Elliot said that there was positive proof that a largely signed petition had been lodged at the Thames County office. Mr Winder said that it would not be right for the Plains County to tontribute towards the Wharepoa side approach road, a.s 1 . the Thames County was in duty bound to maintain the road for its. own ratepayers. The whole matter had been misrepresented, and the Wharepoa riding representatives on the Thames Council were acting contrary to the wishes of the ratepayers-. If the Plains County agreed to maintain its approach road the deputation would endeavour to get the Thames Council to do its share.

In an endeavour to reach some finality Cr Madgwick moved that the approach road on the Plains side be made a 'charge on the whole county.

The matter lapsed for want of a seconder.

After much further discussion the deputation retired and the council agreed to defer further (consideration of the matter till th© next meeting.