CORRESPONDENCE RE COUNTY TRAMWAY, ETC. (TO THE EDITOR.)

Te Aroha News, Volume II, Issue 86, 24 January 1885, Page 7

CORRESPONDENCE RE COUNTY TRAMWAY, ETC. (TO THE EDITOR.)

qi Rf — W'ilJ you or any of your readers answer the following questions ;—; — 1. Will Mr Firth go in for leasing the tramway when the County Council next try to raise a loan ? 2. Do yon think that it is wanting to get possession of the tramway, that caused Mr Firth to oppose the levying of -a rate at the last County Council meeting, and that raising the loan will afford good excuse for leasing the tramway? 8. Is it true that Mr Adams will not now allow the tramway men to sharpen the tools belonging to the tramway on the Battery Co.'s grinding stone 1 i 4. Is it true that Mr Adams has stated he will not allow trucks t rt be emptied into the hopper that will not pass under the guage that he says he •will erect; and that the said trucks barely hold the quantity charged for, as at present filled ? 5. Did the Piako County Council instruct their tramway manager to extend the branch tr«rnw<iy to the Eureka hopper; was tut time of the men that worked on it kept ro be paid by the Battery Co.. or by ta»> Piako County Counefi ; whirii paid (hem, am! hew much «liil it co«!t ? G. Did our member in the Council do right in proposing that Mr Adams be asked to act as consulting engineer for the tramwa , w die the Council ha\e their own engineer here? 7. Could not t.-n different batteries be now crushing Uvvc witli the same water, instead of only i>ne lottery able to work Avith only twenty head of stamps as at present, with all the water up the creek running to wa.-te ; whereas a lar#e numl>er of batteries could use the same water, one battery after another, and give a large revenue both from the goldfield and from the tramway ? a. Is it true Mr Adams' tender (£101) for the new locomotive engine amounted to only one pound cash, and allow as a contra account the £100 bonus voted him by Mr J. C Firth for the balance, did the engine cost £800, and was it Mr Adams that caused it to be purchased ? 9. Did the big tunnel, through which the aforesaid engine was to travel, cost £1800, and could the tramway have been taken round the spur at a cost of £250, thereby saving £1550 in that item alone? 10. Do you not think it will bebettc foi the Council, as soon as the limbering of the tunnel gives way, to let the, tunnel fall ttt and carry the tramway round the spur in the solid rock, as the ccst of keeping the tunnel open v/( uld be more than the cost of laying the tram line rotind the .?pur ? 11. How much of the trestle work from the foot of the Fern Spur to the buttery hoppers ditl the Piako County Council pay for, aud how much of said trestle work is on the Battery Co.'s property, ntui how much of it has been handed over to Mr Cookson on behalf! of the Council as belonging to the County ? I have a great many more questions to ask, but will hold them over for a future issue of your paper. — I am, &c, B*JSY BODY. Waiorongomai, Jan. 21, 1-Bjs. Taking our correspondent's queries in the order- given, we would reply as follows :—: — 1. Quite possible. But if Council let it under the existing conditions re leasing, it wot.ld be a great 'misfortune for the. field 2. We are not in Mr Firth's confidence. It is, however, a very prevalent opinion that the Baftery Co. desire possession of the (ramway. 3. We have heard so, but would wish to give the late tramway manager credit for «howmg a more, friendly ppirit towar Is his successor, fetill, now that the grinding process appears to have hcuoiiio almost a " tine art" at the existing battery, ifc can hardly be expected that anything coming under that definition should l>e done gratis. i. We believe it is true. But can give no ivmpoh for so sudden a change. The trucab are JiileU now, aa tormurly,

anil we never heard of tv« battery manager complaining in the past. 5. We must refer you to the late tramway manager for any information on this matter. 6. We should have thought the County Engineer quite competent to undertake any work required on the tramway, but our representative knows more of Mr Adams au<i hi* abilities as a practical and experienced engineer than We. «Jo. 7. We thought that everybody who knows the field was aware, that, althougn there may not be sullicient water for so many as ten additional batteries, \tili there is ample water, and profitable emplojtmmt for several others. #. Mr Adams tendered by telegram, !we behove. If the county has not yet pud him the bonus referred to, it cannot be other than a contra account, leav- [ ing a balance of £1 to be paid by him, I were his tender accepted. The engine has cost about £800. We cannot say [ who ordered it. 9. We have henrd the tunnel cost about the sum named, but are not in possession of tiie figures. Without a doubt an excellent hoi>e grade could have been constructed lound the spur at a cost of very little, if at all, in excess of the sum you name. 10. In tue last part of your qneiy yon appear to answer this question to your own satisfaction. 11. If the statement is correct that it was all paid for by the county, it is but natural to infer that the whole has been handed over. Our correspondent says he has many more questions to ask. Whilst always desiring to render any possible service to our readers, we would ask him to bear in mind that there are other sources from which more direct information might readily be obtained re the tramway. — Ed. A.N.