RUNCIMAN.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 5, Issue 183, 16 June 1916, Page 1

RUNCIMAN.

RAILWAY STATION SITE. PETITION FROM RUNCIMAN. BEFORE PARLIAMENT. A petition signed by <5(50 residents of Runciman, Karaka, Pukekohe East, Rama Rauia, Bombay and Ararimu protesting against the Railway Department's proposal to dispense with a station at Rudciman and to replace it with a central station as a substitute for both the present Runciman and Drury stations was recently presented to the House of Representatives and being referred to the parliamentary Railway Committee evidence thereon was heard in Wellington on Thursday and Friday last. The delegates in attendance representing the petitioners were : Messrs J. Batty (Karaka), F. Ballard (Pukekohe East), W. Sharpe, T. Alexander and Baker (Rama Rama), J. G. Rutherford, H. Thomas and H. Sawyer (Bombay), and M. Markham (Ararimu). Messrs W. Glasson, R. Flanagan and J. Flanagan attended from Drury to oppose the petition. The Committee sat each day from 10.00 a.m. to 1 p.m. and the evidence from the petitioners' side occupied all the time on the first day and on the second day up to noon. At this stage the Chairman of Committee stated that as the Committee would not sit again until Tuesday it would bo a great hardship upon the delegates to have to stay in Wellington all that time, therefore unless they had any fresh evidence to bring forward he must close the evidence for petitioners. The evidence from the Drury side was then heard occupying one hour. The petition set forth that the hnal decision of the Railway Department to establish a central station was arrived at without due notice being given to the petitioners, that if the station were established in the central position it would intlitt a great hardship upon petitioners, and that as 'the petitioners were by far the largest users of the railway as against Drury, the majority should rule. The delegates' evidence was chieilv on the foregoing lines. It was contended tliac the proposed central site was in a hole and was altogether a bad position compared to the proposed new site at Runciman. Objection was also taken to the extra distance that would be incurred in carting their goods and produce thus entailing additional cost. Further it was suggestei that the Drury and Opaheke stations could be abolished and one station established between those two in lieu thereof. The small amount of traffic that came to Drury as compared to Runciman was claimed as entitling the Runciman people to first consideration. Some of the delegates said they would rather have the present Runciman station with all its inconveniences and drawbacks than have a properly equipped and officered station a tew chains further on in the central site.

The evidence from tlie Drury side strongly combatted most of the foregoing statements, the contention being that as far as choice of sites was concerned the levels of the two sites were practically identical, that the new roads leading to either the central site or the proposed new Kunciman site would be about the same grades. It was admitted that the central site would be a few chains further away from Kunciman but it was argued that such would be far more than compensated for by having a properly equipped and up-to-date station instead of two poorly

equipped stations. It was further pointed out that there were enough dwellings in Drury and Runciman to establish a town district, but that if the station were established at the proposed new Runciman site such could not be accomplished as the station would be too far away. Mention was made that the station question had been a source of irritation and discord in the district for thirty years and it was considered that a good central station might do away with the friction. The Committee were reminded that the Railway Department had given the matter careful consideration for upwards of two years before deciding on a central station, which whilst inflicting no real hardship upon anyone, wou Id be much preferable from the Department's standpoint in the working of the railway. At one o'clock on Friday the evidence closed and the Committee announced that it would hear evidence from the Chief Engineer and officers of the Railway Department at another time and would signify its finding later.