CAMBRIDGE HIGHWAY DISTRICT.

Waikato Argus, Volume IV, Issue 250, 22 February 1898, Page 4

CAMBRIDGE HIGHWAY DISTRICT.

A meeting of the ratepayers of tho above district was held in the Boiough Chambers at Cambridge on Saturday, to consider if it would be advisable to form a Drainago Board. There were present: Messrs C. Day (Chairman of the Road 80-rd, who presided), W. Main, W. 11. Thomas, J. Taylor, W. 11. Wright (members of the Board), B. B. Booth, "W. Selby, T. Wattam, J. HannoD, R. Brown, J. C. Potts, J. MtCann, J. Brown, M. Butler, C.Ewen, C. Roberts, J. Sharp, G. Watt, G. Parker, M. H. Piekeing, J. Arnold, M. Hanlon, H. Ferguson, J. Forrest, Cowling, Hall, Thorp, and many others, in fact the room was full. The Chairman said they all knew why t.h« meeting had been called, namely, to discuss the advisability of formi g a Drainage Board to attend to the drainage of the district. They ware all doubtless aware that at nearly every meeting of the Road Board held in the wet season there were applications received from ratepayers asking to have their lauds relieved of surplus water ; if all-such applications had been complied with, there would have been very little remaining to spend upon the roads. Since the meeting had' been called a petition had been signed by many of the inhabitants of Hautapu, which he thought rendered the meeting unnecessary. He was not aware of the existence of the petition till he came in to attend the meeting, but he was told that it contained a majority of the ratepayers concerned, so that virtually settled the matter, and he trusted those who spoke would be brief and to the point, for the members of the Board had to hold their monthly meeting at the termination of present one. As the meeting had been called at the request of Mr W. H. Thomas, he would ask him to address them. Mr Thomas said that having requested the Road Board to call tho meeting, and, at the instigation of several set tiers, he hatl taken a prominent part in getting a petition signed asking the Governor to declare a part of the Cambridge Highway District a "district" within the meaning of "The Laud Drainage Act, 1893," he thought it only right he should give a few of the reasons why ho had done to. The first reason was that when a Drainage Board wis formed every settler wculd pay, pro rata, according to tho benefit he received by having his laud freed from water. Many would contend that a Drainage Board would be a very expensive body to work, but he did uot thiuk that wou'd of necessity follow, for he presumed the Board wculd be formed of ratepayers residing iu tho dittrict, and as they would have to find the necessary funds they would doubtless see that none of them were wasteel. The present drain was not capable of taking away the water, and the settlers residing at Hautapu knew that a new and much shorter drain could be made up the natural water course of the district that would not only take away all.surplus water but also thoroughly drain the land. At the request of the Chairman, Mr Thomas then read the petition, as follows :—" The humble petition of the undersigned, being ratepayers of the Cambridge Highway District, in the County of Waipa, whose lands suffer from an exuberance of Mater. We, your petitioner*, pray that your Excellency may, by order in Council, he pleased to declare sections Nop. 1 to IS, 20, 29 to 47, 50 to 54, 66 to 71, fe'4 to 87, and ICO of theCambiidge Highway District, an area of 2646 acres, 3 roods and. 38 perches, mote or less, to be a " District" within the meaning of Section 5 of " The Laud Drainage Act, 1893," and that a Board may be appointed to manage the drainage of such district. We trust Your "Excellency nay Le pleased to grant this request, and, as in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray." Here followed the signatures of 18 rate payers, and Mr Thomas stated that the tcheme, as formulated in the petition, only included 25, so there was a substantial majority in favour of a Drainage Board being formed. Mr Selby said from what he had just heard he gatheied that there were only six interested ratepayers who had not. signed the petition. He did not think it right that a member of the Road Board should take round a petition, and he thought many of those who had signed it could cot have understood what they were doing. The Chairman said the Road Board had nothing whatever to do with the petition, but it was certaiuly open for any member of it to take any steps he thought proper as a private individual Personally he felt that he was iudebted to the ratepayers of Hautapu who had (igned the petition; they wanted to help themselves without being a burden on their fellow ratepayers, and deserved the thanks of the inhabitants of the whole district for the manly way in which they had gone about it. If any of the ratepayers of Hautapu were opposed to the scheme they should have got up a counter petition. Mr Selby said he originally made the Hautapu drain at his own expense, and bow he was to be a victim and be made to pay for it again by means of a rate. According to the Drainage Act a rate of / ftl in the £ on the capital value could be made. He was assessed at £I2OO and now had to pay £3 15s per annum, but if this Drainage Board was established it meant that his rates would be increased to £7 10s. At this point there was an animated discussion between Mr Selby and the Chairman as to the advisability of taking a show of hands for and against the establishment of a Drainage Board, the latter contending that only the Hautapu ratepayers were effected and the majority of them had decided the matter by siguing the petition. Mr Watt said it was usehss wasting time It was only those who received the most benefit who would Le taxed to the limit. Mr Ferguson thought the Road Board had been worried with the Hautapu drain for the past 25 years and during that period it had cost him fully but he had not received anything like thb benefit he had expected from it Sometimes the Board would attend to the drain and at others it would refuse to have anything to do with it, consequently the poor settlers had to_ suffer bv losing their crops, etc., and he judged it was high time they took the matter in their own hands and made the drain effective. If they considered the value of the crops lost near'y every jear in Hautapu- they would find it came to many time the value of a drainage rate, and yet some would oppose it. In looking round the room he noticed one individual who annually lost considerably ly floods, and yet that same person had expressed his determination to oppose the establishment of a Drainage Board. Mr Cowliny complained that a map had not been prepared showing the parts of the district intended to be included. They must also remember tint if thty made a big drain they would require numerous bridges to give the farmers access to their properties. Mr Forrest, who was very late in attending, said some had come to the meeting who had no right to be there, as tin y were not interested. He he'd that the official and initial expenses of a Drainage Beard would come to two or three times more than the cost of the work done. They had an examp'c in tin ir County Council tth'ch cost them ul out £l5O a year to hand over about £7O to the Hospital Beard. He believed he was the "first to put down the Hautapu etrain. (Mr Selby objected to that statement, and the speaker said : " Very well, wc won't quarrel about it.") If they broke through the surface soil in making large drains they would get into running sand that would came an immense amount of trouble. If they would lock at Section 9 of the Amendment Act of 1804, they

would find it gave Road Boards nearly full power, as granted to Drainage Boards by the Act of 1893, to deal with drains, etc., and he was cure it would bo sufficient for their purpose. Captain MePhcison, the Clerk of the Road Board, pointed out that the section Mr Forrest hed quoted only applied where the Counties Act was suspended, which was not the case in Waikato. Continuing, Mr Forrest said the greatest objection he had to the formation of a Drainage Board was the fact that the Road Board could not be made to contribute to it. (The Chaiiman contended tl e Board had contributed far too much to the Hautapu drain, and Mr Forrest retorted that it had not contributed or.c fartlrng). if they could get a clause inserted in the Act making Road Boards liable for their fair share, he would be in favour of a Drainage Board, but even then he thought it should embrace the whole district. A very desultory discussion of a conversational nature ensued, and after a litt'c time the Chairman declared the meeting closed,