Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE WAIHI-TAURANGA DISPUTE

(By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.) WAIHI, thU day. Mr Blakeney, settler, and Mr Crimrains, late mail coach proprietor of the Tauranga-Waihi service, gave evidence as to the traffic and transit of goods, etc. Mr Criminins staled that he brought on an average 200 dozen eggs a week to Waihi. Mr Vesey Stewart (chairman of the Katikati Road Board and member of the Tauranga County Council) said that the chief grounds upon which the Government grants were made from time to time were on account of the increasing traffic caused by the adjoining goldnelds. The Tauranga County were deriving no benefit whatever. Other evidence as to traffic, etc., was taken. Mr F. Clarkin, of Clarkin Bros., carriers, under cross-examination by Mr Martin, considered that the traffic on the Bowentown-Katikati-Waihi road was practically nothing. He considered the amount of money asked for for maintenance, repairs, etc., was not required. He could not see what was going to be brought over the road in the way of heavy traffic, except an occasional load. Mr Wilson, settler, said that the number of eggs brought in to Waihi by him from Katikati averaged from 40 to 50 to 400 dozen per week. Evidence for the Tauranga Comity Council was concluded at 5 p.m. yesterday. The Commissioner stated that he would adjourn the Court till ten o'clock to-day (Wednesday), when Mr Martin would open the case for the Waihi Borough Council. WAIHI, this day. The Commission resumed its sitting this morning. Mr. Martin, in a forcible address, opened the case for the Waihi borough. He said he would rtly chieiiy upon the evidence advanced by the other side to prove that the Waihi borough should not contribute. Not till three years after the borough was formed did the Tauranga county make a claim upon the Waihi borough. This was explained in the fact that the Government grants had ceased. He considered the Government had proved a good milch cow for this end of the Tauranga county, and the county had now looked round for another milch cow to take the place of the last Government cow. The evidence produced showed that the damage on the road was caused by Waihi pleasure seekers, yet the outcry came from the Tauranga county, and not from the very people who used the road. He considered this most singular. The prosperity of Katikati was due to the market provided by Waihi, and it would not matter two pins to Waihi if Katikati were snuffed out to-morrow. His evidence would prove that the bulk of the timber did not travel over an inch of road governed by the Tauranga Council. Mr. Vesey Stewart, as chairman of the Katikati Domain, was apparently desirous of having the road completed at Waihis cost from Katikati to Katikati Domain. The agitation had evidently come from the Katikuti people because the Tauranga Council would not assist them to the extent of a penny. Mr. Martin went on to examine at length the evidence adduced by the other side, which, he argued, went to show that the benefits of traffic, etc., were on the side of the Katikati people, and practically of no importance to Waihi. The borough already contributed some £4500 per annum for the maintenance of the Paeroa—Waihi main road. The borough engineer would say that it was perfectly absurd to spend the amount of money already spent or. the road in question. Mr. Martin concluded his address at 11 o'clock. He submitted, in conclusion, that the agitation emanated from Katikati with a view to provide better access to the market tind the Domain. Finally, he considered the amount claimed entirely excessive. He then proceeded to call evidence in support of the borough. Mr. Brown said that it was cheaper to convey goods via Paeroa than by Boweatown. Mr. Morpeth, town clerk, stated that the population of 'Waihi was about 6000. The rates amounted to £400, and there was an overdraft at the barns: Of £8200. The hospital was entirely supported by the borough, which had no sanitary arrangements or provision for drainage. Mr. McArthur, the borough, engineer, said that the traffic on the Katikati-'Waini road was very light, and there was no necessity to spend the rroney except to make travelling agreeable. The annual cost of maintenance was about £250.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AS19050118.2.62

Bibliographic details

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 15, 18 January 1905, Page 5

Word Count
717

THE WAIHI-TAURANGA DISPUTE Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 15, 18 January 1905, Page 5

THE WAIHI-TAURANGA DISPUTE Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 15, 18 January 1905, Page 5