ROADMAKERS.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXII, Issue 31, 31 January 1912, Page 5

ROADMAKERS.

(To the Editor “Stratford Post.”)

Sir, —As I understand the Borough Council are debating the question of the purchase of a road-roller, I beg to offer the following for the consideration of the Council and the ratepayers : ■ . * Cost of roller, Wellington, ... £BOO Erection of shed, landing costs (Stratford) ■ 200 ■;' £IOOO Depreciation ori roller and shed 10 per cent. 100 Repairs,' maintenance ... 52 Running expenses, fuel, oil, • ,isc. i . i.'; ... : 300 Engineer's .salary at; £4; week* ■> 208 .. Total-;.. r £66o This works out at roughly £6OO per annum, if the roller is working all the .time. Of course, the roller would not be. probably, more than one month out of the twelve, and I would ask the Council and ratepayers is it wise to incur this large liability for perhaps one or two months’ work ? And I personally do not think the Councillors have given the matter of running expenses their best consideration.- Surely this 'matter of purchasing the roller could be deferred until the running expenses are definitely ascertained, and the £I6OO spent in metal this year. That good roads can be made without • a roller Broadway will prove, for, in spite of the criticism the foreman was subjected to over this road, it is wearing splendidly, even after about three years’ wear and tear. I hope that the Council will not spend the ratepayers’ money in this latest and most unnecessary extravagance.—l am., etc.. BROADWAY.

P.S.—Could not the Council make some arrangement' with the County Council to, hire their roller.—B. [Our correspondent’s views are discounted by liis extravagant figur-'S. It is hard, for instance, to understand how, if the roller would not bo working probably more than one month out of the twelve.” it could cost even approximately £3OO for running expenses'!—Ed. ‘Stratford Post.”]