The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, MAY 12, 1883. THE RANGITATA ROAD.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1104, 12 May 1883, Page 2

The Temuka Leader SATURDAY, MAY 12, 1883. THE RANGITATA ROAD.

Thu state of the Rangitata road is most deplorable. We have already pointed out how absolutely necessary it is to repair it, but it is probable that it will be some time before it is attended to. The Geraldine Road Board is certainly not altogether to blame in the matter. In 1875 the Geraldine and Mount Peel Boards entered into an agreement to maintain this road, which is in the former district, although it is the ratepayers ot the latter district who use it most. In fact it is the main road from Mount Peel to the railway, and hence the reason that both Boards united in maintaining it. In February, 1882, however, the Mount Peel Road Board, according to the Geraldine Board’s version of the story, repudiated the old agreement, and threw the care of the

road on the Geraldine Board. The latter Board of course refused to accept the the responsibility, and thus between the two the road has been allowed to get into a disgraceful state. We must say, indeed, that the Geraldine Board has a very good excuse for the state of the road. It is true that Mr Platman, who is a member of the Geraldine Board and ought to know, stated that they had had the best of the Mount Peel Board in that and other things. Even so, that fact could not release the Mount Peel Board from responsibility. They made an agreement, and they had a right to adhere to it, or else make an effort to alter it so as to suit their own views. If they found the Geraldine Board had got the totter of them, they ought to have taken steps to secure such advantrge ns would put them on a footing of equality before resorting to such an equivocal line of action as (o repudiate a solemn agreement. It is an old saying that one i i Icof the story is good until the other

told. Possibly the Mount Peel Pond Beard have a very good reason for doing whnt they have doin'. There are gentlemen on that Board well known for their honorable dealings and public spiritedn*ss. We do not believe them capable of countenancing any transaction which would have any suspicion ot shadiness about it, and consequently the dispute over the agreement in ques t ion is to us the more inexplicable. The facts b« fore us at present are that the road is more useful to the Mount Peel than the Geraldine ratepayers ; that in consequence of this the Mount Peel Board signed an agreement to pay half the cost of maintaining it, and that they carried out this agreement until recently, when they repudiated it. The grounds for repudiation are not such, we think, as they ought to advantage of. In order to alter boundaries unde r the old Ordinance, it was necessary for Boar 1 to resign, and the ivsult of such a course would he to render the new Board irresponsible for agreements such as the one in question entered into by their predecessors. The Mount Peel Road Board it appears resigned, and the new Board took advantage of this to repudiate the agreement. That, at any rate, is what tve gathered from what transpired at the recent meeting at Geraldine. If this were all, it would have settled the matter. It appears now that the Gazette notice with regard to the dissolution ot the Board was informal, or was in so ne respect technically defective, so that it is hold in a point of law that the Board was never dissolved, but is still the same corporate body, and as responsible as ever for the agreement. Thus it will be seen that the question is a very complex one, and if the matter is pursued into the mesiies of the law, it may lead to involving both Boards in heavy costs. We think, therefore, it would he a great mistake for them to go to law, and that they ought to come to come to some amicable understanding on the subject. While both Boards are, as one of themselves put if, trying to “ best ” each other, the ratepayers will suffer through the bad state of the road, and that is one thing which must be objected to. It would appear that there is a good deal of “ besting ”going on. Geraldine has OVi r £21,000, and Mount Peel about £IB,OOO, and the great quarrel is to see which of them will nurse its money best. It is a v n ry commendable characteristic in public men tonsn fix' funds entrusted to them carefully, Extr va gance is the rule amongst public bodies, and therefore carefulness ought to be regarded as a failing which leans to virtue’s sides, Still it is possible to overdo P, and it has been done in the case of tli 3 Rangitata road. There is nearly £40,000 to the credit of the two Boards, and we ask themselves, Is it right that they should allow the road to remain in the state it is in, when a few hundreds would put it in proper order ? Are they treating the ratepayers fairly by doing so ? No doubt we shall be ranked with anonymous scribblers by the Geraldine Board for saying so, hut we do not mind that. Wc have a duty to perform, and the fear of being called bad names will not deter us from performing it. Anonymous scribblers have done their share of the work of bringing the world to that degree of civilisation which it has reached, and will do more, we hope, unless they are all wiped out by next October’s comet.