TRANSFERENCE OF PROPERTY

Taranaki Daily News, Volume L, Issue 60, 4 September 1907, Page 3

TRANSFERENCE OF PROPERTY

_ TO DIFFERENT ROAD DISTRICTS. JOCKEY CLUB AND COUNTY COUNCIL. The Taranaki County Council on Monday discussed the" petition to have the Taranaki Jockey Club's property transferred from C'arringtoii Road District to the Mangorei Road District, the chief I reasons for the change being that the club had no access to the Carrington Road District, nor had it any community t) of interest wilh it; that the expenditure nvoulj notrbcuefft the club, and that the only road the expenditure of money 'upon which would benefit the club was I the Mangorei road, in the Mangorei road ' district. Mr Mussell Fleetwood, secretary of the Jockey Club, attended m support of the petition, and mentioned that one of the clauses in the petition 1 required amendment. The club's property did not front the Mangorei road, ■ but the Avenue road, which was a county road. He explained that Hi:: club's lands were mostly in the Mangorei district, and they desired to be in (only one. Tlicy would also affect a :saving, as the Carrington road rates were tlio heavier, and the club objected ito paying the recently-struck special j I rate, from which they would derive no) i benefit. '

The Carrington Road Board opposed !the petition, and Messrs C. Carter and J. Lashbrook waited on the Council to state objections. Mr Carter first desired to make it clear that he opposed Ithe change in the interests of the Carrington road 'district, and not from personal motives, lie stated that the Council was not bound to accede to the petitioners' request; it was not obligatory, but optional And he thought that if the Council found fliat injustice would be done by granting the petition they could refuse it. 3fr Carter referred to the closing of the Hoidsworthy road forty years ago. That road had connected the Avenue and Carrington roals. Three years ago part of the closed road was purchased by the club and vested in its trustees. Thus the ! Jockey Club by its own act had cut off , its property from the Carrington road. |ln that transaction the signatures of the .club's trustees had been necessary. This [petition now before the Council was signjed only'by the secretary, and lie questioned, therefore, whether it was in order. The chairman said that if askod to , rule on the point ho would decide in favor of .Mr Carter's objection. | Jlr Carter refuted the assertion tli.it the clul) was interested in the Mangirei , road, pointing out that the nearest Man- 1 gorci district road was fully three i miles from the racecourse property, 1 which fronted on the coiratv road, and : not a district road at all." tie could 1 have understood a petition asking to bejc included in the New Plymouth borourhji. for the club was continually using (iiJ's borough streets, but he could see noil reason for the proposed change fnml l one road district to another. Lookin" \) at the financial aspect, he said that I 1

even if the petition were granted I'no club would have to pay the special rate struck in connection with the recent loans, and would also earrv with them this year's general rate, which had been struck. The club had had a letter too from his Board intimating its intention to levy only a half-pennv rate next rear and on that basis,'and including I 3-Ild special rate, the club would be paying only 4s more than now. This was a very trivial matter, he thought,! to trouble the Council with at all, md as it was likely to cost the club £lO, or £ls to effect the chanre, he thought it would be bad business.' Mr Carter, asked the Council to consider not only' the petition, but the injustice that' might be done to the Carrington road district in reducing its revenue. TIkI Council, he pointed out, would <™ n nothing by the change, hut would have ! the expense of altering its riding bonn- 1 claries. He mentioned that whereasihe' Jockey Club at the bottom end of ihe district was doing all it could to get out of the Carrington road district, (he top-end settlers in the Mangorei district were very anxious to get in. With regard to the alleged community of in>' terest between the Jockev Club and' the Mangorei road district. Mr Carter' suggested it would he in the Mamwei Itoad Board collecting the rates. " He thought some further explanation wis' due by the club. I

Mr nutwood denied that the dub' had ever had access to the ■ road by the TToldsworthv , w d. it would be impossible to make tho road Mr Skinner, county engineer, was nskod his opinion, He said tho TTol-ls worthv roirl Mas closed in the <.ld Provincial Council days. Part of it, ho understood, was included h t],» raw . course proper. Part was still open/ [The road could Irve boon formed. ' The chairman considered the petition! | out of order. The trustees should havel signed for the Jockey Club

The Council was "pmcending to ifscuss the point, when Mr Fleetwood lurried back with Mr Kerr, th- club', solicitor in t')i? matter, and he explained that the signature was quite valid, md the trustees' were not required to si-;,). The objection was "nonsense, and it showed to wfiH straits the Oirrine+on Road Hoard had been driven when" if .urged that trivial and childish objection."' _

_ Cr. Stevens couldn't see bow the T.-I.C. would benefit by the chnu;rc.

Or. Adlam. foresaw 'the. possibility of a fresh election if riding boundaries were altered.

Or. Tate considered the request reasonable Any owner of property would like it in only one road district. The Council had nothing to do with the club's gain or loss by tho change. They all knew there was considerable feeling imported into the matter as the result of the road board's arbitrary loan proceedings recently. He moved that the petition be acceded to.

The 'chairman seconded pro forma. Cr. George, thanked Cr. Tate for being so willing to give away part of the Omata riding revenue. There was nothing in the objection to paving rates to two road boards. He opposed the petition.

Cr. Hopson said not one valid reason for tho change had been adduced. There was something else behind nil this. Cr. Adlam opposed. Cr. Andrews also opposed, on -be ground that there was reallv no reason for interfering with the riding boundaries.

The motion was put and lost, onlv the mover supporting it.