PROPOSED INGLEWOOD COUNTY.

Taranaki Daily News, 24 February 1919, Page 9

PROPOSED INGLEWOOD COUNTY.

COMMISSION AT INGLEWOOD. J The commission appointed to take evidence in regard to the .proposed-Inglewood County (Messrs. G. H. Bullard and D, S. Wilson) sat at.lnglewood on Friday. Mr. F- TO. Wilson represented the petitioners j&jid Mr, Quilliam, and with hint Mr.'K. for the Tara•nalfl' County Council, whb objected to the constftutibn of the county. The chairman said that he wished to clear up one point, viz., that under the Act a new county could not obtain a greater subsidy than that to which the flrea wouM have been entitled under the old county. Mr. A. Gorkill, chairman of the Moa Road Board, one of the promoters of the bill, stated that the area of the proposed county ,was 128 square fniles With a valuation ih 1912 of £900,000. The'popula\ioh was 3188, equal to 24.91 to the square imle t It was the seconU most* denselyted areaNjin *the Dominion. Injpewobd was the largest stock centre in Taranaki, and all the settlers, within the proposed area did their marketing in Inglewood. In the area the Road Board administered there were 135 miles of whilst the Taranaki County administered--31 of metalled and three Unm'etalled. .The Taranaki Council received £4665 for the district, equal to £133 per mile of road, , wh!:reasj:he Moa Board maintained their j'ro'ads on" a'revenue of £l7 1(K per mile. In fixing the bounUarieS of the proposed cbunty they hart studied natural boundaries and c'omiyunit'y of interest. The settlers in the additional areas included had petitioned to join the pro-' posed county. Stratford County Council had willingly agreed to the altered boundary at the south. The proposed county did not mean another local body. It was merely constituting the Road District a county. They were only taking over an additional 34 miles. A large 'portion of the traffic from the district came direct into -Inglewood without going on a Taranaki County road. 'The Taranaki Courist ; liad-|*akcii a* poll over -the to'taise'a loan to 'ei'Qct bridges, buF the reshlt had not yet b'ffen disclosed. Settlers, however, were opposed to it on the grounds that they had in many cases built their own bridges and would now be rated,to erect bridges for other people, in one case, to serve six settlers. The Taranaki Council had made a rule of sending the plant to the Mo'a Riding in the winter when the work cost 33 per cent. more. The Moa Road Board housed their plant in the wintet and'-put the men to profitable employment. Up to the present the Taranaki Council had not liad an engineer nr overseer, and supervision therefore suffered.' Mr. Quilliam suggested that as it was perfectly patent that the ratepayers wero dissatisfied with road board control and wanted a county, they should join the Taranaki County.

Mi - . Corkill admitted that an extra looal body meant increased office cost and increased cost of administration. He estimated the revenue would be £BOOO. Mr Hickman F. Russell, valuer, New Plymouth, gave evidence that the settlers rjjithin the boundaries used the roads mostly" to, go to*lngl6w'ood. (he considered' there, had been a considerable increase in the", valuation' sinc'e^lflJ2. Waimate West, a small county, was tlie best roaded county in Taranaki. T. MePhillips, chairman of the Waimate County Council, deposed that its area was 72 square miles, the valuation being £448,000. In a small county the administration might cost a little more but the extra efficiency more than compensated fdr the extra cost. Tlieir administration was costing £550 for a revenuS of £800(). J. 11. Lyon, farmer, Waitni, and a member of the Moa Road Board, eriticjsed the county balance sheet, alleging that the Moa Riding was not fairly treated. He contended that a bridge on the Junction Road had been left by the Council in a dangerous state for several months.

Mr. J. A. Bridge, Waimate, gave evidence in favor 'of small counties, which could be controlled by one engineer. Tliey as a portion of the Waimate Road Board had hived off the Hawera County, and he would certainly not be willing" to go back to thejHawera County agaiii. Mr. D. T3SEI, contractor, nit approve of tliT methods adopted by the Taranaki County in ebnneetibn with its road metalling. He considered its crusher obsolete and the method of shiftir from depot to depot expensive. James Hunter, farmer, Waitui deposed that When ho canvassed for signatures to the petition he only received one refusal. Mr. Buckley, clerk to the Moa Road Board, gave evidence that on a rate of 21-8(1 the annual rates would be close on £BOOO.

•T. B. Simpson stated that when eanvagsingVhe found gTekt dissatisfaction of the Taranaki and .gawi instance's in support. Mr. Qnilliam submitted .that the onus of establishing the advantage of making the change lay in the petitioners, and he considered that not one valid reason had been given and the commission would be justified in not going further into the matter. He, however, proposed to sliow affirmatively that the district was adequately served by being partly in the Taranaki and partly in the Stratford Counties, and that it was not dSsirctble that the district should be constituted a county. He <qiioted authorities to show that the concensus of public opinion was against the multiplicity of small local bodies. He submitted that larger counties were more economically and efficiently managed, as they could have better plant and more expert engineers. If the settlers required a county there was no reason why they should not merge into the Taranaki County and so do away with one local body. He pointed out that whereas there Were formerly 42 road districts in Taranaki there were now only two —Parihaka and Moa. -»The average .area of countiesjitu New Zealand wdsJBSS sqnSfiWffles, ifffif the population 401&Twhereas Inglow&od' was 128 and 'the population n((80. If another county was interposed between Taranaki and Stratford it wo" 1 1 probably mean a toll gate wall.

J. S. Connett, chairman of the Taraliaki Comity Coifticil, deposed that lie was a member of the Wr.itara Road BCard for sortie years. £e considered the merger had been beneficial to al! concerned. When the Moa County Bill came before the Local-tßißs Committee'in 1014 it wa'S recommenced .that tlie district should merge in Ifhe Taranaki County. The Taranaki County had done its best to bring about the merger. Two portions of the Moa Road District 1

merged, though there was opposition from the Rond Board. There ratepayers had* been dissatisfied with the Road Board's administration. The Egmont Road was in a bad state. The Council had just purchased a motor dump (ruck which Would 'enable metal to bo farted riiueli cheaper. The Taranaki County Council had agreed to establish auotliw

plant with iter /Centre .in Ingletfood to work the Moa. mid a neighboring riding. If tM M6a Ridingtillerged the rates of administrative expenditure would decrease from 8 to 6J or 7 per cent., whereas if the Inglewood County was established the rates would increase to lli per cent. The Moa Riding had had fair treatment. The Council was considering the" establishment of permanent roads. It was the Subdivision of the counties that led to the .erection of the toll gates. Taranaki County Council had erected tlieir toll gate at Punilfb owing to the Egmont County-Council refusing to pay a subsidy to .the Taranaki County ■Council. In these days tif motor transport larger bounties teould be advantageously worked. He favbre'd the appointment of working riding foremen under an engineer.

To Mr. Wilson: It was the Taranaki County Council's intention, if possible, to get a portion of the revenue from the Stratford ' toll gate. He. admitted that the Lepper road had -had. .to carry' a lot of extraordinary timber traffic, but considered the board should have made a leVy sufficient to cover this. The Egmont Road had to bear a lot of tourist 'traffic. 4 • Mr. A. Morton, a member of the Taranaki County Council' for seven yeafs, considered there was great community of interest between New Plymouth and Inglewood, which would increase in the future.

R. O. Ellis, clerk to the Taranaki County Council for 13J years, handed in statistics showing that there was considerable saving in the management charges of large as compared with small counties. In 1917 the cost of management of Taranaki County was 8 per cent. This wffuld decrease if Moa merged. If the proposed Local Government Bill .had gone through two Taranaki bounties would have been cut out. The existence of the Moa district affected 'the Government subsidy t6 the extent of about £BSO per annum to the County.

H. Jones, farmer, Kaimata, stated that lie signed a petition in favor of the proposed "doiuity, but he did not give the matter due thought, and- was opposed to the Inglewood County, preferring thai the Moa Road District should merge. As a hard working farmer and ratepayer he -thought he was paying two men to do one man's job. l Joseph Brown .said he at one time waß in favor of tSe formation of an In'gTowood County but notion the .present boundaries, as lie considered it too small Merging in- the Taranaki County would b'e more in the interests of the ratepayers. He considered a large area necessary to keep a plant ko.i"• time, and so work it economically. If the Inglewood County wis established there was nothing 9urer Wfaii that t.i'.l gates would be established between Inglewobd and Taraaaki The chairman: I>, looks something like a tin new County that a toil ; r 'ite vould ba put n|.. Mr. F.'E. -.u:""l*be travels. over the 'Why is the toll gate not established to-dty 1 ' Mr. Brown: I favor toll gatej as the fairest method of taxation.

To the Chairman: He would favor a county being established, including the Ngatinmru riding of Clifton County, the Waitara, Moa and Mangorei ridings of the Taranaki County. This would make a compact ertunty. Harry Peters, of Egmoht Road, Kaitmiro, an ex-member of the MoA Road Hoard and Taranaki County Council said that after a fight his .district had Beeeded frofn "Hie Moa Road District, owing to th'ejjad state of their roadsThey now Miatl fair roads and there would be a resolution in the district if they were placed in the proposed Inglewood County.

H. C. Sampson, farmer, Hillsborough, and a former member of the Egmont Road Board, gave evidence as to the advantages of merging which had more than justified expectations. John Knowles, Tariki, strongly favored merging.

Mr. B. P. Lethbridge, chairman of the llangitikei County Council for live years, and a member for 11 years, deposed that the area of his county; was between l.'iOO and 1400 square miles with a valuation of £700,000 and a revenue of £40,000, raised by an average rate of -Jd. He favored larger counties because it would pay to employ a first-class engineer and a more competent staff and have the best road plant possible. A small county could not run this. The parochial element was not so strong in a larger county. Their financial arrangements were easier, and the county .could bs more economically managed. They could, wdrk without waiting for the Government subsidy. Roads, motor cars and telephones had to a large extent done away with the need for small counties by spreading the community of interest over: a much larger area. Among a group of small counties there'was always : the need for commissions to decide bridge or road control. One of the causes for subdivision was the limit of X6OOO made by the Government loans to local bodies, but that was now done-away with. In his county' there had "been no friction with the ratepayers; in fact, two districts had been added. The county was well roaded. ' , The commission will consider the evidence and report as requested.