THE SHANNON BRIDGE.

Shannon News, 19 May 1925, Page 2

THE SHANNON BRIDGE.

* (To the Editor.) Sir,—ln your report of the Horownenua County council held on Saturday last it appears that considerate consideration was given as to whether the Borough of Shannon should contribute tq the punt on the Manawatu river;— dr. Ryder said he would "like to see the Shannon people go tree for one reason:. They hau hammereu away at the protecion of his bridge for years and his should be credited to them." The chairman (Mr Monk); "Did they ever do anytmng more nhan make a noise. U bridges could be built with noise they could have erected two bridges across the river

in place of the old one." I thank Cr. Ryder for his acknowledgment, but tne chairman requires to have his memory brushed up. The Shannon Borough Council certainly brought the dangerous condition oi the ' bridge before the Horowhenua County Council and were practically told to mind our own business perhaps not in these words but that is the substantial way of putting it. The Shannon Borough then suggested that the bridge and its approaches should be made one matter ana the Horowhenua County, Manawatu County, Foxton Borough and Shannon Borough be the contributing bodies, thus the Shannon Borough offered voluntarily to become a contributor. The offer was not accepted or acted on. The shannon Borough next approaiched 'the Minister of Public Works and asked him to use his powers in the matter in making the bodies aforesaid contributing bodies tc the bridge and approaches. The Hon. the Minister could not see his way to do this. There again the Shannon Borough asked to be put under compulsion to contribute. This is what Mr Monk calls noise. Well, it was not gross negligence of public duty. Nothing was done to save the bridge and it was as the Shannon Borough Council stated duly wept away by flood. Although the bridge was up for about sixteen years the 'Horowhenua County never even put a coat oi paint on it—<the only thing that body ever did was to put some sort of asphalt on the decking in such a manner that crab holes soon appeared and held the water; the bridge was lasting too well; it required something to cause decay. The Shannon Borough was willing to contribute to save the bridge; this offer was rejected. The negligence of the governing body allowed the bridge to be swept away. Now that it will take about lve times as much to restore the (bridge, is it right that the Shannon Borough council should pay for the negligence of others.—l am, etc., W. MURDOCH, Mayor of Shannon.