THE POWDERHAM STREET BRIDGE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 376, 29 April 1910, Page 3

THE POWDERHAM STREET BRIDGE.

(Tu lilt; liditor.) | Sir, —With your permission 1 should i like to review tlu' position sumeu'iiai in regard to the above bridge. Going hack to the time of the loan, what do we li'iid the position to be? Why, simply this: The Council, on their part, said to the ratepayers—it you will give us power to raise £3OOO we, on our part, guarantee that we will for that sum provide you with a lull-width bridge. The ratepayers agreed, and carried out, their part of the contract by voting for the loan. Xow, on that the Council were in honor bound to a certain course, and if uni'orseen circumstances cropped up in the way of not being able , for the money; raised, to do the work, the Council | ■should have ta.ken the ratepayers into their confidence and reviewed tile posi-, tion again, but, instead of that, they' plunged headlong into a plan of work that is going to land them anywhere but 1 where the ratepayers expected. The other night, when the deputation waited on the Council, Mr. Brooking said the deputation -hardly knew where they were, and lie considered the Council were in the same predicament, and the subsequent discussion revealed the fact that he was not very far wrong. My reasons for making this assertion I will endeavor to show. The Mayor, in his remarks, said the Council knew what' they were about, and had every conii-] ,dence in their estimates, etc., lor the, work, and when they had got rid of the contractors they would show the deputation that this was so by doing all that had been promised, but he immediately afterwards rather spoilt this rosy picture by having to admit that already their data was so good that £SOO above what it was supposed to cost had already gone in extras to the foundations I alone. Then Councillor Wilson, whose conscience had, on his hearing the Mayor's remarks, evidently given him some trouble, to put himself at any rate rhrht with the deputation, said that ho did not wish to mislead anyone and stated, in effect, that he saw no prospect either at -once or in the future of the Council being able to do the work with the money available, unless the owners did certain things, etc. Then Councillor Bellringer said lie was not p;'"p:iml to spend £2OO or £3OO from rates towards completing the work, showing plainly that the present unsatisfactory position must have been discussed <!>y the Council: and tints, v.-a-!-ing between the lines, it was quite evident the Council did not- quite know where they were, or their remarks would have been more in accord with, and not, as they were, somewhat contradictory of. each other. And as to the assertions by the Mayor that the deputation were going on what the "street corner engineers" said, His Worship can rest assured that if wrong statements have been made then, as far as one can learn, some of his own colleagues on the Council are not altogether blameless. How-; ere, "street corner engineers" or Councillors, it is quite evident that the Council started out before they were ready and had the cost counted. If not, how comes the Mayor's statement that they were at sea to the sum of £SOO in foundations alone.. And, if this is so, where are they going to be landed by the time the contractors leave the work, and where is the magician's wand hidden that is going to give the Mayor the wherewithal to carry out his promise to the deputation of a full-width bridge and no filching away any of the Powderham street bridge money to pay for the Harbour Board land for Gill street extension? —1 am, etc., INTERESTED. P.S.—As to the question of the 22ft. wide street, anyone who knows anything of the batter required for the depth of earth there will be in the filling, will see at a glance that, without wing ■walls, the 22 feet on top is aboutall they can get under existing conoitions. A CORRECTION. To the Editor. Sir,—l generally refrain from rushing into print, but the facts are totally wrong about '•'Farmer," for he did not demand his bill, as he intended paying it on a previous occasion, but the local storekeeper had his shop closed. As regards the school committee, the farmer was not put out, for he retired in favor of someone else. Xow, would it not be wise for the local storekeeper to mind his business, and not interfere so much with local matters? He may be- like the mushrooms—fall and fade awav.—l am, etc., THE TRUTH.