LUCAS' BY WHARF.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume XXIV, Issue 2127, 12 February 1897, Page 3

LUCAS' BY WHARF.

To the Editor.

Km, —My attention ha- been rJrriwnto a petition got up by Messrs ReH and HJtfKay against the erection of a wharf af'tucaft' Bay. -I don't know that I would have taken any -notice Of the petition, as it is not worth the paper it is written on, "hud it not "been for the

very misleading statements made by both the gentlemen who presented it. 1 think that -when two leading lights of'the

community appeor before a pubKc body like the Akaroa County Council, they should atleastconfinethemselvee strictly to tile troth, and not try to influence

them 'by false statements such'as Mr Reid toade. Hβ said that the erection of a-new wharf would Tnean the increase of the rate by 25 per cent to all vther ratepayer* only Mr "Black. 'Does Mr, Reir , mean to let me off from the rate,; or how'Soes'he explain that it will 'in-j crease it to all Oth<T3 orilyme?? Now, "in J the -first 'place, the 'rate will <ndt 'bej increased anything like thw afiaourjt, as the cost- of the work will not exceed; £100 to £150. Takingitat the higher figure, the interest and sinking fond would amount to £7 10s over the whole district. My share of this will be £1 T7s 6d ; my wharfage Will amount to £3, which are at present lost, will mean tfeat I pay £417s 6d of the new loan,, leaving the other twenty-five ratepayers £212s 6d to make up amongst them,] ©r anincrease of a little over T> percent,' instead of 25 per ceHt as quoted by Mr Reid. Statement No. 2: Mr Reid 1 said that Mr Black need the Wainui wharf mare than all the resi of the ratepayers put together. 1 know you don't allow swear words in your columns or I would like to use them Just no but the statement •& so absurd nnd ridiculous that it scarcely requires contradictory. During the past twelve months I have, used the wharf twice : I landed n>o posts- end a grass-seed etfipper. My wool has always been shipped out, of Lnsne , Bay, and had I a wharf there' I would not land an ounce at Wainui, as it is a six mifo drag compared to one mile out of Lucai* Bay to get to the Same place. Mr Reid's unselfishness is something remarkable. He would like to have the wharf done away with and increase the rate, thus doubling the rate on those like myself, who don't use the; wharf. This is the last straw that breaks the camal's back. I trust the members of the County (joancil will see through tbis little dodge and put their foot on , it as it deserves. Mr McKay said Mr Black asked the ratepayers to erect a wharf for his own benefit. Does Mr McKay forget that I am tbe principal ratepayer in the district, and will have to contribute tbe most largely to it as I have shown above. He always says it I had a private wharf the wharfages would be lost. Is he only trying to mislead the Council, or bo dense that he cannot see that the wharfages are at present lost through my shipping at Lucae* Buy, where, If a wbart were erected, I would have to pay wharfage ? I must apologise for taking ap so much of yonr space, but if I have succeeded in showiDg the unfairness of the way in which the rate is struck on a property

like mine, which derives no benefit from i*, I hope you will excuse me. As for the six individuals who signed both peti-

tionp, I find tbeit collective rotes amount to £1 8s 8d per year. The uew loan would mean an increase of about Iβ 6d, or 3d per head. lam more than surprised that, considering the small amount the property work involves, any resident of Wainui would think of opposing a wor* that is for the advancement of the district, as I claim to have done more in the way of improvements and employment of labour <!nring my two years' occupation of that * rritory than has been done dQring the j :•: vioue twenty years.— Yourv, cic, G. J. BLaCK.