THE CAMBRIDGE RUN.

Waikato Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 2360, 25 August 1887, Page 2

THE CAMBRIDGE RUN.

A petition, signed by a number of ratepayers of Cambridge, having been presented to the borough council at their last meeting, re the lowering of the registration fee from 7s Gd to Is, it was decided to hold a special meeting to discuss the matter, and Tuesday last was fixed upon as the day. The council met at 3 p.m., and a meeting of ratepayers was held at 2.30 p.m., so that anyone who liad an objection to the application as set out in the petition might state his views, and a definite proposal bo prepared for submission to the council. There were present—The Mayor (Mr Gwynnelh), Crs. J. Hally, H. Gillett, and A. Clements, Messrs Kirkwood, Brockelsby, Corcoran, Hickey, Bull, Miuott, Henson, Smerdon, Alford, Robertson and Pearce. The Mayor read the petition and also tho following letter that he had received : “ Sir,—-As lam unable to attend the public meeting, I wish to ask that it should be explained whether, in the event of licenses being granted to put cattle on the runs at Is per head, a refund will be made to those who have paid 7s Od. I have two cows registered to the 30th June, 1888, at that fee, and I think it would be unfair to grant other persons similar privileges for Is. It is stated by the promoters of tho low rates of registration that if their plan is adopted the ranger’s salary may be saved by the abolition of that office, and the appointment of a committee, who would see that no uu registered cattle are allowed on the run. If their object is to save money for the borough, it could be attained equally well by a committee of owners of registered cattle at the present rates being formed, but I think no owner of a few cows need grumble at paying the fee now charged, and if the run is to be thrown open to cattle at Is per head, there is nothing to stop anyone buying a quantity of store cattle on speculation when they can get such cheap grazing, and so overcrowding the run.—l am, Sir, yours respectfully, John Sharkey.”

The Mayor then invited discussion, and asked those present, if they did not agree with the petition, to appoint a deputation to wait upon the council at 3 o’clock, and state their views, as the petition would then he considered.

Mr Alford said he thought the present fee was a fair one, it was less than Is 4d per day per animal, and if it was not worth that, it was not worth anything. Cattle upon the run were sure to do a certain amount of damage to gardens, and he thought some confiscation ought to be made for it. If the expense of a ranger could be saved, the fees might help to reduce the rales, and so benefit those ratepayers who did not keep cows, but wore equally entitled to the benefits of the run, if they chose to exercise them. By those means all ratepayers would bo bonefitting by it, and yet the owners of cows would get the major portion, as not only would they get grazing at Is 4d per day, hut they would also have a portion of the Is 4d returned to them, in the reduction of rates. If that method could be adopted he did not think any owners of cattle in the township would grumble, even if the fee was raised to 10s. If the fee was made very low, there was the possibility of small ratepayers running a large number of cattle, and then feed would soon become scarce, and consequently a larger amount of damage would be done to gai dens. He thought it would be against the interests of the ratepayers to lower the present fee.

The Mayor said the number of cattle registered up to the present was 30, and that would only half pay the ranger’s salary for the year; so there was no possibility of it affecting the rates. If the fee was reduced to Is it would hardly cover the cost of registering expenses. Mr Gillett thought they must either let the fee remain as at present or declare the run open. The petitioners said they would form a committee to do the work of ranger, but those sorts of committees never worked well. What was everybody’s business, was nobody’s ; and in the end the work was left undone.

The Mayor suggested that it the run was thrown open, it might bo possible to adopt the English custom that was used in villages that had common lands attached to them, viz., by employing a “herd” who would tend the cattle by day and bring them home by night. The council had really no right to charge fees, and when paid they merely stopped the ranger taking proceedings, but any policeman could summoiisj those who had paid them either under the Public, Offences or Public Works Acts and the council would be powerless in the matter. Mr Smerdon thought os per head would be the happy medium that would satisfy all parties, and suggested that if cattle were cot allowed on the run at night, the damage to gardens would be reduced to a minimum.

Mr Kirkwood said that a fee of 7s Gd eleven 10s would not keep cattle out of gardens. Mr Gillett: No ; but it would lessen the number of cattle on the run, and there would then be more feed, and consequently the gardens would not he so attractive to them.

Mr Kirkwood: One tame old milking cow will often do more damage than a lot of wild ones off the run. I have known some that would almost turn tho handle of a door, they had become such adepts at thieving.

Mr J. P. Thompson (the clerk): The present registration of cattle does not entitle them to remain on the run at night. They should be removed at sun-down. The ratepayers then adjourned to appoint a deputation, and the special meeting of the council was held, at which the Mayor and councillors mentioned above were present. The minutes of tho previous meeting were confirmed, and the petition and letter from Mr Starkey wore read. Messrs Alford, Smerdon and Minott waited upon the council on behalf of the ratepayers. Mr Alford said the ratepayers had appointed them to wait upon the council, and to request that the authorities would wink at the cattle being on the run in the day time, but instruct the police to summons the owners of any that were permitted out after G o’clock in the winter and 7 o’clock in the summer. Mr Smerdon said the object was to do away with the expense of a ranger. Proposed by Cr. Hally, seconded by Cr. Clements, “That the recommendation of the ratepayers be given effect to, and that a proportionate amount of the fees paid be returned to those who have registered their animals.”

The Mayor said it was an important matter, and one that would affect the incoming council more than the present one. He should therefore move, as an amendment, “ That the consideration of the petition and proposals of the ratepayers be held over until the first meeting of the new council.

Cr. Gillett, in seconding the amendment, said they had only one policeman, and he did not see how he was to look after the cattle on eight miles of streets, especially after it was dark.

Cr. Hally: We must have another policeman. They have five or six at Hamilton, and could ivcll spare us one. Cr. Gillett; I am afraid, if the run is thrown open, it will cause endless litigation among tho ratepayers, and do more harm than good. The Mayor: The voting being even, I shall for tho first time exorcise my second vote in favour of the amendment, as the majority of the incoming council will bo in for three years, and it consequently affects them more than us. The meeting then closed.