RATING THE WAITOMO COUNTY.

King Country Chronicle, Volume I, Issue 17, 15 February 1907, Page 3

RATING THE WAITOMO COUNTY.

TO THE EDITOR. SIR,— My attention has been called to a letter in y r our issue of 2nd February, signed " Ratepayer," which is evidently written by one who is entirely ignorant of the matter treated of, namely, the lack of assistance i(in money) by the Government, for the purpose '• of road making. " Ratepayer " kindly informs the public, and their representatives (the Council) that we cannot raise money if we only strike a half-penny rate, which is about sufficient to pay office expenses. Most of the inhabitants of the Waitomo County were aware of that fact before seeing " Ratepayer's " letter, and as it was the general wish that the general County rate should be applied simply for keeping the machinery of the County in working order, a half-penny rate was struck, as being sufficient for the purpose. But those ratepayers of the County who have been taking an active and intelligent interest in County matters, were not only willing to rate themselves at a much higher rate for road making purposes, but through the Council, entered into negotiations with the Government, for the purpose of securing a loan on lands, and agreed to, and voted for, a special rate of 2d for road works. They were incited and encouraged to do this by the Minister of Public Works, and the Chief Road Engineer, with the assurance that the Government would surely and gladly help those who helped themselves. The grievance we have is that after the above encouragement, which induced the Council to incur the expense of a poll, which was almost unanimously in favour of a heavy rate as security for a loan, the Minister coolly informed us we could have no money, either as a loan or subsidy. The Waitomo County Council are not in favour of road making by dribbling and patching, and only that can be done by the annual expenditure of rates, even the highest allowed by law, but the Council, and a majority of the ratepayers, are in favour of raising substantial loans, and doing substantial work with the money so raised, and for that they are quite willing to pay heavy rates. —I am, etc., D. H. LUSK.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—ln reply to "Ratepayer's letter in your issue of February Ist, evidently • " Ratepayer" has not gone very deeply into the matter of making roads in this County. He suggests a 2d rate. Well, the present %d rate brought last year, roughly, about £3OO, so the rate he suggests would .bring £I2OO. An engineer would have to be employed at, say, £300; cut the amount left up between Te Rau-a-moa and Taumarunui, and what would it do towards roading the back-blocks ? " Ratepayer " calls the present rate paltry. Well, fancy wayback settlers paying a2d rate before they have their sections bringing them any returns. Never mind what other Counties are doing, this County is too young to pay big rates. I have no doubt, from the tone of " Ratepayer's " letter, that he pays rates on a very small section, and, whether the , ~*'" or low, it would make little the same man on 500 aciC of unimproved land and rate 2d in the pound;he would be the first man to growl. No, sir, the settlers in a new country like this, don't want rating to make roads. They have years of uphill work to make their sections productive. No one knows, only those that have been there, how many drawbacks the way-backs have. Can " Ratepayer " tell us why the' Pakeha settlers should pay a higher rate for land miles from the railway outlet, while thousands of acres of Native lane close by, pay no rates. Why should we pay to improve Native land—l am, etc., GO STEADY.