CORRESPONDENCE.

Taranaki Daily News, 8 September 1921, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

■HYDRO-EUEOTRICITY AND HOT AIR. (To the Editor.) Sir, —The tumult and the shouting dies; the “representative” (by the way, who do they represent?) “business men” and ratepayers depart, and the Daily News, drawing an imitation Northcliffian robe about itself, turns down an editorial thumb. “Better by far could the Mayor and some of the councillors be spared. There is no need to say more,” and the writer might have added “I am Alpha and Omega.” Alas! for the ratepayers’ “ticket” so /Victorious at the poll; the blessings which then were poured «m its united head have 'become cursings. It has had tbe effrontery to have,opinions of its own; it has differed from the Press (a sure sign of mental inferiority) and it must die! “There is no need to say more.” Well! Well! But why not? Why should not people ask whether the borough is to be run from Currie Street or from Liardet Street? Why should they not ask where were all these “representative” men when they might have placed their unrivalled wisdom and acumen at the service oi ratepayers and the borough generally? Why should they not ask whether, having elected men to carry on the affairs of the. town, those men are to be allowed to carry them on, provided they act honestly, or whether they are to be stampeded from office when they happen to differ from these self-styled “representatives” who can’t spare the time (or whatever tbe reason may be) to take on the job and get elected properly. As to your quite gratuitous statement as to the relative value of’ the Mayor and some of the councillors and the “chief administrative officers,” it is at least open to question whether your opinion is entitled to be taken as infallible. Is it wise to challenge comparison? You might be asked to give reasons.—l am, etc., F.D. September 7, 1921. [.The “representative” men referred to ■by our facetious correspondent are, ior have been, rendering, public service in one form or another, which we certainly cafinot say of our correspondent. -Ed.]

HYDRO-ELECTRIC WORKS. 1 , . ! <To the Editor.) r Sir, —I attended the ratepayers’ meeting re the hydro-electric scheme last’ night, and listened carefully to all the arguments advanced on both sides, and came away perfectly convinced of one thing, viz, that no one is capable of forming any opinion of real value on this matter unless he has visited the works and knows something of the geography and topography of the country concerned, which many of us' do not. The names of many rivers and streams . were quoted as probable sources of sup- ; ply, of which I had never heard before. , and unless one knows something of them, and their position in relation to the other streams and the present works, the position cannot be grasped. One could not but admire and sympath1 ise with the advocates of the scheme in their whole-hearted belief in the great future before New Plymouth, a future in which I have perfect faith myself. but while they indulged, in what Americans call “high fainting” and the painting, of rosy pictures, the only speaker who really came down to “brass tacks” was the Mayor, whose straight out utterances and hard facts and figures, arranged in logical sequence, appealed 'to me considerably, nor could 1 see or hear any attempt on his part to misrepresent the position as to increase of cost, as you unkindly suggest in your leader this morning. There is another matter which was not touched on by any of the speakers ’yet which it seems to me is one of considerable importance ,«and on which the ratepayers should bo informed. If these various streams are diverted from their natural course, will not compensation have to be paid to those landowners through or by whose property they now flow, and has tlie probable cost of this been taken into consideration in any of the estimates? One can easily imagine how, sav the property at the Meeting of the Wafers, would deteriorate in xalue if the waters were no longer there to meet, and there would be many similar cases, without doubt, were the different streams spoken of diverted. —I am, etc., B. Ne|w Plymouth, Sept. 7.. 1921. [The impression created by the Mayor’s remarks was undoubtedly that the <-£40.000 estimates for tlw scheme under way had swollen to £172,000 through errors in judgment bv the eon- ( suiting engineers, wherees the actual position is that the council added con- . siderably to the original scheme by pro- . viding tile present big No. 2 tunnel at

great cost, by increasing the size of No. 1 tunnel, and. making other additions, whilst a substantial increase in the cost was brought about by conditions over which the engineers hod no control, such as the increase.in wages, iron work, and electrical equipment. These matters were not explained by the Mayor, but they were not overlooked by other speakers who were conversant with the position, and consequently ratepayers were able to view the matter in the true perspective. The. whole of the cards were not put on tlie table by the Mayor, whose case suffered accordingly,, as evidenced by the almost unanimous vote against the council’s policy. As to compensating riparian owners, the Government lias acquired statutory powers of control over rivers, so no compensation is payable.—Ed.] A LITTLE DEAL IN LAND. (To the Editor.) Sir,—l was present at the ratepayers’ meeting on Tuesday, and heard the Mayor state that‘the land through which No. 2 tunnel goes has now been purchased. I. subsequently li|eard that the fortunate owner was to receive £l2OO for less than four acres, with certain rights of access over other portions of the land. Ca,n you tell me if this is correct? Also if it is true that at the end of last year the owner offered the .Council- the same land at a much less price, and that the council refused, the offer and favored taking the land under the Public Works Act? Also, if this legal procedure was suspended and the work entrusted to a member of the council, who, failed to carry it out, and in consequence the workmen were ordered off the ground a week or two ago. and given a holiday while negotiations were entered into by the council and the own- '

er, and that the owner got his own price, which is greatly in excess of its value? —I am, etc., LUX, [Enquiry at the borough offices elicited the information that the matter is “in committee” at present, and that particulars will only be available at next meeting of the council. —Ed.]