PUKEKOHE WAR MEMORIAL

Pukekohe & Waiuku Times, Volume 9, Issue 563, 3 September 1920, Page 2

PUKEKOHE WAR MEMORIAL

A STORMY MEETINQ. HARMONY ULTIMATELY PRE-

VAILS.

CANVASS FOR £SOO,

The most noticeable feature of the public meeting held in the Pukekohe Borough Council chambers on Wednesday afternoon, in connexion with the proposed war memorial, was the paucity of the attendance. When the meeting start* there were, with the exception of the Mayor (Mr. C. K. Lawrie), no others but members of the Pukekohe Chamber of Commerce, of whom a good muster was present. Cr. D. R. Hamilton arrived shortly afterwards, and Cr. Geo. Armstrong made an attempt to be in the "also starteds," bhjt failed, the meeting being over when he passed the barrier. However, he had been on council work nearly all the day, and had just come from inspecting a certain municipal work, so he was net disi qualified from entering for future I events.

The Mayor explained the purpose of the meeting, namely, to settle the question of a memorial to the fallen soldiers and others who served the Empire in the Great War 191418. The Borough Council were unanimously of the opinion that the memorial should be erected on the Roulston Memorial Park, a condition of which gift was that a memorial, at a cost of not less than £SOO, was to be erected on the property. In reply to Mr. H. Dell, the Mayor I reiterated that the £SOO must be spent on some form of memorial on the ground. Mr. V. S. Roberts (secretary of the Pukekohe Chamber of Commerce) stated that the swimming baths proposition was decided on by vote of ratepayers. The Mayor replied that such was the original intention, but it was found that the baths and memorial combined would cost £I2OO.

Mr. R. F. Webster, president of the Pukekohe Chamber of Commerce, wanted to know what right the council had to override the vote of the people. The Mayor replied the the council had considered the matter in committee and came .to the conclusion that the £I2OO could not be secured by voluntary subscriptions. Mr. Webster regretted the delay in the matter of a memorial, all the funds required could have been included in the loan proposals. Now the project had become cold in the hearts of the people, and they were disappointed at the indecision and delay on the part of the council. He had hoped to see an inspiring memorial erected long ago. . Mr. C. Cooper asked what amount the Government would allow local bodies to spend on war memorials, and if there was a £ for£ subsidy. The Mayor did not know, but promised to obtain the information. The i reason of the delay was that it was thought undesirable at the time to clash with the effort to raise subscriptions for the technical high school. Mr. Roulston's offer caused a further delay. He thought a memorial gate on the Koulston Park would be the best proposition:' The property was. worth at least £2500: But the meeting was called not *o much to say wher*the memorial was to go, as to devise means of raising the.funds. Furthermore, a war memorial should be paid for by public voluntary subscriptions and not by the levying of a rate. The swimming baths would be constructed in any case, but if the £SOO was not spent on the Roulston Memorial Park the property would be forfeited in two years' time. / *\ Mr. H. Dell said the council had not taken the public into its confi- > dence. and the*public was now doubtful of the council's bona-fides. There was not one person in Pukekohe who was not in favour of a memorial, but the public opinion was that the council had not come Out into the limelight, it was losing caste evary day, because it had ,not done the square thing. The Mayor,, on behalf of the council, denied that there had been any deception or secrecy. In regard to the Kennelly hall site (which Mr. Dell had referred to), Mr. Kennelly had been waited on and had not been able to give sufficient land frontage for a hall site, and therefore there was uo use taking a poll on that. Mr. Dell reiterated that the council had broken its promise and had not kept faith with the public over the hall site or the memorial. Mr. F. Perkins expressed disappointment that there were so few of the council members present. He, with Mr. Roberts, thought the hall site chosen was' the most suitable one in the town. But in regard to the Roulston Memorial Park, he was very pleased when it was donated, but was greatly disappointed when the £SOO condition was disclosed. It was unfortunate. Had it been given free of any such condition successive councils would have spent much more than £SOO on it. To be forced into spending £SOO by voluntary subscriptions was a sore point. He would be willing to subscribe if the "tag" were taken off. The Mayor asseverated that Mr. Roulston, had been fair and aboveboard, and as far as foregoing the condition complained of, Mr. Roulston had stated that day that he would not make the slightest alteration if all Pukekohe came to him as a deputation for thaVobject. Mr. C. Cooper said he did not blame Mr. Roulston for the attachment of the memorial condition"; suth stipulations were commonly made, and the £SOO would increase the value of the people's property. Mr. Perkins considered that if the council could obtain Roose's bush, of ten.acres, for £IOOO it would be.the

better proposition. Cr. D. R. Hamilton thought it would be a pity to lose the Roulston Park, which would then probably be built upon. In the first instance the Park was given for a town hall site, but this condition had been deleted in favour of a memorial, this latter suggestion coming from the council. The baths were to be built in any case.

After informal discussion a more amicable spirit graduallv prevailed. Mr. T. E. McMillan regretted that the £SOO condition was imposed; not that there was anything wrong with the condition as a condition purely and simply, but because of the past history of the town hall and memorial proposals. However, it would be extremely unfortunate if the town lost the splendid property donated, because there were very few "public breathing spaces" in the borough. Perhaps a little more candour from the start in respect to all of the matters alluded to would have obviated a lot of the present dissension, the origin of which dated back some years. All things considered, he was of the opinion that the best thing to da was for some one to move that the meeting approve of the raising of £SOO by public subscription to erect a memorial on the Roulston Memorial Park. As he was an ex-sol-dier, and the memorial was to be in honour of both the dead and the living who served, and afcb, as his property interests in the town were comparatively small, he Would not care to wove in that dttMUoa him*

self, but would like to see some resident of longer standing and larger interests do so. The Mayor moved that steps be taken to raise £SOO .to erect a war memorial on the Roulston War Me- 1 niorial Park.

Mr. H. Dell seconded the motion, which was carried almost unanimously, Mr. R. F. Webster alone objecting. All those present, with the council members ex-offlcio, were appointed a\i committee, and to make arrange w ments. »*>•<* - In regard to the basis of rawing funds, Cr. Hamilton suggested that these be based on rateable so that each person would have an Idea , of how much he should give. ' *. A sub-committee consisting of Mayor, and Messrs. Hamilton, Web* ster, Roberts, Armstrong were jH»f_ pointed from among those present (all of whom were to form a general committee) to further the project The meeting ended in an amicable spirit, those present showing a very commendable desire to sink their differences of opinion for the good of tha cause, as it ware. This good feelijc was strikingly demonstrated by ttorfact that the seconder of the motion was the most outspoken in his criticoli of certain aspects of the MM .-" ■