STRATFORD TOLL-GATE.

Taranaki Daily News, 12 January 1921, Page 6

STRATFORD TOLL-GATE.

INGLEWOOD COUNTY’S PROTEST. ALLEGED UNFAIR TREATMENT. At a recent meeting of the Inglewood County Council a strong protest was; made against the alleged unfairness of the whole of the revenue from the Stratford County toll-gate at Waipuku going to the Stratford County without the Inglewood County Council receiving any assistance towards that portion of Mountain Road which it had to maintain, and it was then decided to protest to the Minister of Public Works and suggest that some relief should be afforded to the Inglewooh County in regard to the matter. A further suggestion was made that a commission should bo set up to inquire into and readjust the matter. The jnatter came up again at yesterday’s meeting of the Inglewood County Council, when the Minister replied that he had looked into the request and found that a commission was appointed to inquire Jnto the question as to whether. or not a toll-gate should be permitted, and all the local bodies interested in Mountain Road, from New PlymouXd down to Hawera, were represented. The proposal was merely for the erector. of a toll-gate, the proceeds of which were to be devoted to the permanent improvement of that portion of Mountain Road in the Stratford County, and all the local bodies concerned, except Stratford Borough, agreed to the proposal. Furthermore, an agreement was entered into with the Stratford County Council that the proceeds of the toll should be devoted exclusively to the permanent improvement of the section of road within its boundaries, and when the ; work had been completed, or in the event of the Council not devoting the proceeds of the toll to the permanent improvement of the Road, the Government might at any time abolish the toll or reduce the charges levied. From a report furnished by the resident engineer, added the Minister, ho found that there was still about four miles of re-surfacing and tar-sealing tc be completed. This being so, the purpose for which the toll-gate was set up and to which all the local bodies agreed, had not yet been effected, and unless ths Council could show that the proceeds of the toll were not being devoted to the* purpose for which it was established, he did not see on what grounds he could recommend the Governor-General to Intervene in the direction suggested. The chairman (Cr. A. Corkill) said there was no doubt that the Stratford County Council was spending the money on tar-sealing the road, but it seemed hard to understand why the Taranaki County had agreed to /the proposal that the whole of the proceeds should go to the Stratford County, especially as the toll-gate was established on the boundary between the two counties. It was most unjust and unfair. There was a strong feeling against toll-gates, and although there was no doubt about that, if other people were allowed to erect them, it was up to Inglewood to apply for one to. Cr. Jones: Two or three. The chairman: Yes. We can’t sit still and see other counties getting benefits ahead of us.

Cr. Cameron agreed that if toll-gates were not to be abolished, the Council should certainly apply for them. Cr. Simpson remarked that the Stratford County received £2500 a year from its toll-gate. The chairman: It’s very unfair that Stratford should get a net revenue of over £2OOO a year and that the Inglewood County should have to maintain the same"’road and get nothing for it. Cr. Simpson thought that the Council would be justified in protesting against the matter by letting a portion of their road get,in a very had state. The chairman: Two wrongs never make a right. Although the position is very unfair we must maintain our share of the road. Cr. Stuart moved that the chairman, the clerk, and the engineer, draft a strong reply to the letter. Cr. Hunter suggested applying to the Minister of Internal Affairs for a tollgate on the north side of the Waipuku bridge. The chairman thought it would-be advisable to again communicate with the Minister of Public Works before asking for a’toll-gate.

This course was agreed to, and Cr, Stuart’s motion was carried unanimous-