“Taranaki Central Press” WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1937. FOR THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

Taranaki Central Press, Volume IV, Issue 379, 10 March 1937, Page 4

“Taranaki Central Press” WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 1937. FOR THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

w i I There can be no question that in the past month certain enthusi- ; asm ,which was then apparent for the removal of the railway sta- [ tion to the Warwick Road site, has waned. Deeper thought has ■; changed many people’s views, and nowhere is that clearer than in • the case of members of the executive of the Stratford Chamber of ! Commerce. A month ago, the Chamber offered its co-operation to the Borough Council in the matter of the proposed change of < site. That was on February 9. At the last meeting of the | Borough Council, on February 15, when the letter from the Cham- ; ber was received at the council table, a resolution was passed fav- j curing adherence to the original agreement to shift the station. A report of the proceedings at the February meeting reads: I Cr. Gordon: The Department is looking to the Council for an expression of opinion. I suggest that they be asked if they are preparing any plans or want a lead from the Council. ... It is a pity to leave the matter in the air. The Mayor: As a matter of fact it is not left in the air. Years ago the town agreed to shift the station. The Railway Department bought a lot of land and we have never been advised that, the proposal was abandoned. It is up to the Department to advise us if it has been aban doned. I take it that there would have been a new station had it not been for the slump. Judging from what the officials aid to me, there are two different positions and the Stratford people are left to fight it out. Cr. Gordon: Are you sure the Department will give us a chance to expres an opinion? The Mayor: Yes, I am sure of that. Cr. Gordon then moved that the Council adhere to the original agreement to shift the station. The Mayor: If we send the resolution down, then they will know what we want. Cr. Gordon’s resolution was put to the meeting and carried, with Cr. Finnerty voting against it. The point at issue, therefore, is whether the Railway Department have sufficient expression of opinion from the citizens of Stratford to warrant their adherence to the plan of shifting the station to the Warwick Road site. In the words of the Mayor, “If we • send the resolution down, then they will know what we want,’’ they have. Where, then, is the justification for the attitude of the Chamber of Commerce refusing to discuss the matter further until something official emanates from the Department? The leader we published last night submitted a third scheme for public consideration. Rather than shift the station to Warwick Road, and rather than allow present conditions to continue, we suggested a further alternative. At one stage a plan was considered for the extension of the railway yards across Fenton Street to the Pa tea River. Our suggestion regarding the value of the property on which the “Central Press’’ is located, concerned that earlier plan. Following the resolution of the Borough Council on February 15, supporting the removal to Warwick Road, and subsequent semi-official rumours, we concluded that the first plan of taking in this property had been dismissed. Rather than allow the futility of the Warwick Road proposal be proceeded with, we had no course other than to support the scheme outlined . Whatever the eventual outcome, however, we do suggest to the Chamber of Commerce that until it has received a definite mandate from its members to support any proposal ,it should not pass by further examination of the whole question. We say that the town has not given a definite expression of opinion on the subject, despite the last Borough Council resolution. Hence our opening of a third proposal. We are told to-day that the original scheme for extending the station yards to include the properties on the corner of Fenton and Juliet streets is still a possibility. Does that not prove to the Chamber that the people are not united? Does it not prove how hasty last night’s conclusions were?