THE DRAINAGE LOAN.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10077, 26 August 1910, Page 5

THE DRAINAGE LOAN.

To the Editor. Sir, —I have read with interest your leading article in to-day's iss'ie on this subject. It seems, to me th-ib every right-thinking and public-spir-ited ratepayer will admit the force of your arguments. The ratepayers are also indebted to His Worship the Mayor for the careful and lucid manner in which he placed the matter

before the ratepayers at the public meeting. The net result of all argument must be that a Drainage Scheme is necessary, and that, this being so, it behoves the town to deal with the matter once and for all,and ratepayers to vote to spend the full amount that may be required for the purpose provided—"and here's the rub"—they are satisfied that the scheme proposed is the right scheme, or at any rate a proper, practicable • scheme. You, Sir, say that "the Borough Council has devised a scheme which it thinks will serve the township for many years to come." Why cannot the Council go further and say that it is morally certain that this scheme is the best and most practicable one to adopt. This could be dene quite simply by taking the | opinion of a consulting engineer of recognised eminence, and let the Council be armed with such an opinion in favour of the proposed scheme, before the poll is taken. I say consultiag engineer advisedly, because a gentleman who is not carrying on the general profession of engineer would have no interest in condemning or approving the scheme. Like most of the speakers at the public meeting, I have every confidence in the Engineer's ability to supervise and carry out the work proposed. Nevertheless the scheme itself has not the hall mark that would enable one to .say with confidences I am satisfied this is the best and proper scheme to adopt." What answer has the Council to. mate to tlie ratepayer ■ who says, "I would vote for the proposal, but I doubt whether the scheme is the best one possible; the expenditure of £31,000 of ratepayers' borrowed money should not be undertaken without this certainty." I am not a resident of the borough, and pay rates only indirectly, but'the future of the borough is my future. If there is any difficulty in the way of paying for the opinion required, I am prepared to subscribe £2 towards the cost of same. One hundred subscribers at the same rate would provide sufficient to pay the full feo that might be asked for the opinion required. I make this suggestion in arder to remove the only honest reason one might have for rejecting the proposal. Ido not think there are a dozen ratepayers who would be so wanting in public spirit as to vote against the proposal merely because they happen to be within the area at present served with drainage.—l am, etc., ANXIOUS.