CORRESPONDENCE.
[Our columns arc opm-fer free disetis-ion ; but we do not hold ourselves responsible for the opinions of our Correspondents.]
TO.THE EDITOR OF THE STANDARD. Sir, —I read in your issue of Saturday last that the P.B. Road Board hare suggested an alteration in the Fencing Act, by the minutes of the meeting hold on the 30th of October 1872. We are certainly not enlightened as to the alteration in contemplation, but rumour, ever rife, says that it is the intention of the Road Board to institute that three rails are not a legal fence. When the Road Board wanted an alteration in the Fencing Act, they should consult the ratepayers of the district at a public meeting. The opinion of all those whom I have been conversing with on the subject, is, that the Road Board was not elected to legislate on, or suggest, a subject of such importance to the district, without the opinion of its inhabitants. Hoping you will publish this in your next issue.—Yours, &c., A Ratepayer.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/PBS18721116.2.8
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Poverty Bay Standard, Volume 1, Issue 7, 16 November 1872, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
171CORRESPONDENCE. Poverty Bay Standard, Volume 1, Issue 7, 16 November 1872, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in