CORRESPONDENCE.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume 4, Issue 1256, 16 December 1882, Page 2

CORRESPONDENCE.

TO THB EdITOB.I ij ;i»-"s;. coloniit}Mr Ji & ; Ferguifob has recently thidelighti. of ctrilisatioo, ilrepteientedj •by : /the'Streets and roads bo well taken care of by the City Fathers of Masterton, and has eisayed to "wrestle" (to use his own "'expresnon);with-afpnriiim rof • the wilderness: some 25 miles distant from that centre, His property is situated in No, 4 ■'Ward of'tbe Highway District, (lie ratepayers of which are at pre! sent represented by Mr W. H. Beetbam, a gentleman who was one of the first Chairmen of the Board, and whose name commanded the confidence anil reapuot of the district long- before MrFergusW or myself were even known in it. ■; Let us see what Mr Fergusson says of him, If Ihave read.the letters whioh have appeared. in your columns aright, it is ith'is: That 'although; the interests of Mr" W, H, Beetham and Mr J. 0.. Fergusson are -substantially identical in road matters, Mr Beellmm hasjeliberately conspired with the other members of the Board to rob himself and: .his neighbors of the money which was. the subject -of the recent petition, and has helped to hnnd it over to tho settlers of another' Ward. Putting aside tlie othor members of the Board, this, if true, is,surely most extraordinary conduct on Mr Beetham's part, and demands some.explimation, Mr Beetham's traffic has for many years been carried over one of the roughost roadß ever used for oven bullock-dray traffic,

ami io cofltly has the work of road-making proved to boj that even with a rate uf something like £3OO a year from tlio property in which he ia a partner at least Jon miles of his road,is yet without an inch of metal. Is it powible, then, that despite those 'urgent needs lie came to the conclusion that,he would bo committing » wrong by claiming money for himself and the settlers of his Ward which fairly..bolonged to No, 5 Ward?' Let me ask your readers to look at the faots and judge for themsolvos. In Provincial days tbe boundaries separating Wardß No. 4 and B:wero laid off by Borne Government officer in Wellington who evidently could have known nothing whatever of the configuration of I hit country, and in such a manner that a portion of No. 4'Ward, which ..now pays an annual rato of £96, was actually separated from tho rest of the Wards by a" practically impassable range of hills, cmild make no use whatever of the roads to which Mr Fergusßon would fain apply this money, and consequently had to send all its traffic ovev those of No. 6. Under these circumstanoes, when I beoamo. Warden for No. 5 (I think in 1878), I represented the facts as stated tn tho Board of that day,'and intimatod that unless' tliey saw their way cloar tn spending the rates of this particular pnr. tion of No. 4 on the roads of No. 5, (lit "ratepayers would be compelled to take the necessary stem for altering the boun dary. The Board (including the Warder for No. 4, Mr Norman Beetham) at onc< recognised the justice of. my request, am the decision granting it stands recorded ii the minute look, .1 certainly admit tha an irregularity has been committed b' omitting to get the formal; sanctioi "of the Board : once during, eacl succeeding financial year, but the'in jus tice of allowing the rates o! } ' aiiy pat ticular property to be spent upoi roads of which it could ninke no us whatever, Was, lo'mo, an obvious tha until Mr Vallance succeeded Mr Normal Beetham in the Wai'donshiplneverthough it necessary to return to the subject.' Upoi that occasion, or very shortly afterwards I mentioned to Mr Vallance what hai been the practice up to that time, and h dismissed the subject by simply remark ing that he supposed it was all right This circumstance Mr Vallance seems t< havecompletelyforgotten.butlcanscarcel be held responsible for that, Putting therefore* this, irregularity, aside as boiii) really of no substantial Importance th practical outcome of the whole business i that the present board, recognising ih circumstances of the case now to bo sub stantially the same as in 1878, hnvo b; their recent decision ratified the c.mclu sion then aimed at by .'an almost total! different sot of men, hut Mr, J, C Forcussrm has quite a different rule fo the distribution of Highway Board funds and one to which I would invite th special attention of your readers. In hi first letter, and referring to the petition he says:'-" Wo showed it had been dc cidod by the Board in pnfit yours that al rales raised in a Ward should bo expondoi in that Ward, and that this custom hai hoen maturod by years and had been ai understood rule." I have been a membe of .the BoardJor the last tive years or so and yet know nothing of such a rulo, no can I imagine any greater absurdity or in iuatioe than would in : many casos hi brought about by its wiforcomont. If i were possible to map out the boundarie of overy ward so that oaoh settler couh oart : his produce by'travelling over m roads except those in • his. own particula Ward qr Highway djstrict there might b lomo chance of justly applying such a rul but'takiuij the prcipfat or'any possihl future subdivision of tlje distriot into con sideration theidoa is an utter absurdity What then, it may bo asked, is thefairos basis upon'which rates can he expendod In my opinion the ouly. one is that mou tioncd by Mr W, H. Beetham in his recon letter that each ratepayer has a right t< have his rates expended upon the roads o whiclihe makes tho greatest use, and whicl consequently benefit him.the most, —thi to be quite.irrespective'of whether th road be within his,own Ward, or cvei Highway District. I have consistent!} advocated this principle since I have beei a member of the Board j andean point on to Mr. Fergusson numerous instancos o ••No.. 5 funds being thus expended outsidi its boundaries, and at my speoisl request Ho is again in error when he says thai the Board reVeVsed the decision of th Committee whiph' was,' appointed to'con aider tho .petition.'; The pommitte wa appointed, not, to deoido, but merely ti look into the accounts and report, leavini the whole Board to come to a final deois ion, The language'used! in the Com mittee'a report'ii dear on thiipoint, thi aotual words being recommend that ; the sum of: £204 hi placed to the credit 0f.N0..4 Ward." Thli recommendation.again Mr Fergussot would-, have us believe was meant as i final.disposaldf;the£2o4, i whereas itwai clearly understood to mean only! at adjustment of irregularity in the acoounti leaving the final approbation to a subse quent resolution 1 as already described. " must also takeexctptipn to another fallici 1 have lately heard, put i Warden should .have control of monej raisod itt his, Ward; without foference. t< the other members of ;the Board. May ] ask for what purpose do'our Boards mee at all if Wardens are empowered to ac inlhis way. The simple fact is that will Highway Boards as in all similar bodie: (he rule of the majority at'a meeting, is by isq'ujte true that eacl Warden* when, no injustice is apparent is by;xourtesy'■ allowed:.a'prepohderatinj voice ih.the details of his own Ward, bn this of course isrherely pleasure o theßoard. A short • releren'ce to part o. Mr letter, and I hav< done.; 'He there states that the propertiei now oocupied by Messrs Moore, .Chalmers, and himself, paid a yearly rate of £18 : as far back as 1875, and that it has;now increasedhtd: £34.; This ? with I subsidies makes up a total ofisoo,land he gravely asks yj it• all; j t ln the absence of the actual figumwewnTtake

?his owb/and bearing in;miud thetyotyof 'Subsidies having been reduced to lOn and eveii 7a 6dKin:th6.p6uhd, the probability in ->lidt; nearergj^ L : -y6uld. ; mow> , icour"' aiel> raproient tbe actual sum to b» dealt withMmMaf lie hasstated, Seducing Jay'■|M;ipr^rieral : expepaea, we. have abourjfi2so left for'abtual expenditure ia 7 ; yearsV'"over'*'the';2s miles of rough country which.separates him from Mas-. terton.\But Mr Ferguason in his innocence has'.•T'-'-fir "better plan'-than : this.;' :He would make full use of the 17 miles of road betyyeen;,Brancepfl.th,,.ttna , J.Mßs• terton, and' made at ';; the expense of the other ratepayers,; but .would carefully confine the; -expenditure: of rates. derived from ..the- three properties, mentioned to the aebtibn" lying "betweentheir, homesteads and Bcnncepeth. What a v 'charming:'method : 'of distribution of Road Board fuhdar: especially, for Mr Jar; gusson. If he could only in addition have appropriated, the amouit awarded by the Board to No. 5 ratepayers, he would '-be quite Chippy; man. '.I fear, however,. ,that ; lhe ; Board will hold the three properties mentioned liable for contribution to the whole 25 mile's of wad which they undoubtedly use, and on the whole I would stronglya'dvjseMrFergusaoiiwhen nexthefeela a desire to rush into print it would be,-Tell to obtain a few aotiul fads upon which to base what he calls his arguments, ' ■ .-■:'■. . lani&o., : W. 0.. Buchanan.