ONEWHERO.

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 6, Issue 274, 11 May 1917, Page 3

ONEWHERO.

HAMILTON'S DEVIATION SCHEME

! "NO FURTHER ACTION "

The much discussed Hamilton's deviation scheme once more received attention at the Raglan County Council meeting on Wednesday last when two rival deputations waited upon the Council to yet again air their views.

The circumstances are, it will be remembered, that the agitation concerns a proposal to revert to an old line of road through Mr Hamilton's property in place of the present thoroughfare known as the Gully road—a portion of the OnewberoWairamarama main road—the contention being that existing bad grades and costly maintenance would be oveicome by the deviation being carried out. Two polls of ratepayers have already been taken on the subject in the form of the ratepayers being asked to sanction a loan for the work, but on each occasion, viz , last October and in March last, although a majority of votes were cast in favour of the proposal it fell through by reason of a three-fifths majority, as required by the Counties' Act, not being secured. At the meeting on Wednesday Messrs S. Crawford, W. Keyes. E Attewell and G. Cullen formed a deputation in support of the deviation and the negative side was represented by Messrs Chas Walter and E. H. Collier with Cr Moore.

Mr Crawford, in urging that the Council should again consider the question, said he felt sure the matter would have been easily settled if the council as a whole could have inspected the locality. It was, said Mr Crawford, a big matter for Onewhero and he asked the Council to reinstate the road and to use the money which had been allocated for the Gully (£500) in forming and metalling it. He pointed out that if the road was reinstated it would injure no one and would tend to im prove the value of property at Onewhero. The Council's Engineer, he added, was also in favour of the reinstatement. There were, he said, two or three against the loan proposal simply because they would be taxed in respect of it. Mr Crawford, in conclusion, urged that the subject should be fully and carefully considered and he believed that if the road was reinstated it would add considerably to the value of land all through the Onewhero district. Mr Keyes, supporting Mr Crawford, asked for fair consideration and pointed out that the state of the present road was very bad, the hill having a grade of one in seven and one in nine, He reminded the council that they had the money in hand to carry the proposal through and he hoped they would accede to the deputation's request. Mr Attewell contended that the proposed road was the better one of the two. When he asked why anyone opposed it he was told because " there was too much feeling in it." The application for the reinstatement should, he considered, be taken on its merits.

Mr Cullen also spoke in support of the remarks of his colleagues. Mr Walter admitted that the alteration would give the best road but said he opposed it on financial grounds. It was doubtful what the road would cost as labour was scarce. The present Gully Road was not a bad one and he did not think the road suggested would benefit the district so much as had been claimed for it. He asked the Council to take the result of the poll as final and conclusive and he reminded Councillors that about £6O had already been spent in connection with the matter. Mr Collier advised the Council not to allow a few men to cajole them to have another poll, Mr Crawford took exception to the word " cajole " used by Mr Collier and the chairman said that word should not have been used, whereupon Cr Collier withdrew it and apologised.

On the motion of Cr Seavill it was resolved that the council should go into committee to discuss the matter.

On the council resuming it was briefly reported that the decision was that the council would take no further action and the sum of £2OO, lodged by Mr Crawford and others, was ordered to be returned.