PARNELL RAILWAY BRIDGE.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVII, Issue 195, 16 August 1906, Page 6

PARNELL RAILWAY BRIDGE.

DEPUTATION TO THE HON. G. FOWLDS. A deputation, consisting of the Mayor «i Auckland (Mr A. M. Myers) and Councillor 1-. I. Bagnall, was introduced to tlie Hon. George Fowlds at the Minister's room yesterday afternoon by Mr 1-". K. Batumi. M.Li.ll. He .-aid the matter the deputation wished to speak .about was of considerable interest to (the people of Auckland and I'ltrncll. namely, the railway bridge tit the foot -of the hill, which in its present position was no doubt a great danger. Mr Myers said he wished first to apo ■logisc for the absence i>t the .Mayors of farnell and Newmarket. As he knew 31 r KowhU was well acquainted with the fuels of this ease, it would not be necessary for him to go into details. Personally, he might siy he was or opinion it would be a crime for any Government to extend the existing pier-* ;it that bridge. To do so would mean loss of life some time, and no Government should be allowed to do anything calculated to make such a danger possible. The Government bad agreed to put a onc-.-pau bridge conditionally upon the local bodies interested contributing

)£SOO towards the extra cost of work entailed. Tlie local bodies, however, felt very strongly that there was no obli-

g:ition on their pint to do so. If there was auv such obligation, he would not hesitate a moment regarding the expen-

diture of £500 where the safety of human life was concerned. They failed to

sec any valid argument whereby the Government was entitled to call upon

the local bodies to contribute towards Ahat work. He therefore urged the Government not to hesitate, but do justly tend erect a one-span bridge instead of -extending the piers of the existing one. Mr Bagnall said he fully endorsed the

Jrcmarks of previous speakers. The Bridge was. lie contended, a danger to Traffic now. but to extend those pier--ivould make it still more dangerous. Traffic Yvas growing to and from the eitv. and the road under the Parnell

Railway Bridge was one of the main

.outlets eastward. A comparatively .small expenditure at the present would do away with that danger for the future, and to increase the existing destructions in the road would be inosl ■objectionable. lie did not think the Co .vernment should hesitate at all in doing what 'the deputation asked ill the ■interest of Auckland and the suburbs

The Hon. G. Fowlds said this was n subject that had already been brought before four or live Ministers of the < rown. He would be only too glad if he was able to say that considering the ■con; para lively small amount involved he would do his best to get their wishes complied with. There was. unfortunately. ;i principle involved in this matter, from which the Government would not depart. That was. not to undertake to defray the total cost of any new alterations to existing works within the boundaries of boroughs, which ailerations were rendered necessary by the growth of the boroughs. That bridge had been in its present position for over 40 years, and was put there by the Auckland people. . The Mayor: By the. Government. Mr Fowlds said the. bridge was built Tiy the Provincial Government. Supposing that railway had been built and run by a company, and the growth of the city necessitated alterations, they would jiot expect the cumjjany to defray the of the cost of sneli alterations. The principle involved in this matter was one which, if departed from. Yvould hind the Government in endless troubles in various other parts of the colony, and they did not feel called upon to incur additional expenditure in such a way. The Government had offered to eon tribute towards the extra to the extent of a larger amount lliiin would be required if they did not make a onc-spau bridge. Therefore it was essential that some contributions should be made towards the extra cost involved by the local bodies most concerned in having the alterations made, Reducing the question to bare fails, the danger Ib.it now exi-fed was the recall of t he" gi owl h o! the towns. They must remember that every .1; 100 expended by the Government on a work of that nature wua X 100 less in be spent on making roads in the Imckblocks. where all must admit they were much needed. Therefore the local bodies -liould recognise the necessity for doing something in the matter themselves. If it was merely a question of increasing the Government contributions towards the cost to the extent of another >J 100. he might try to do something, lint he knew it was useless to ask the Government to bear tinwhole of the extra cost entailed.

Mr. Canine said the work now being done could not be carried on tin- present piers as they stood. It then-fore became necessary, cither to remove the piers altogether and eie-t a one span bridge. or else lengthen the piers and increase the danger proportionately. The danger was menace enough now.'bill to lengthen th'« piei-s by an additional ISft must greatly increase the danger. The argument did not. therefore, apply about the bridge having been built by the Provincial Government, bcea use the present Government, by lengthening the piers, -would be increasing an exist ing danger.

The Minister pointed out that the Goveriniicnt could, ii necessary, make a Olltvspail bridge for the new part, and leave the other as at present, which would nut be increasing in nny way the existing danger. If the local bodies wished to remove the existing danger, they could contribute the .Colli.) asked for. and the Government would find the Other €1000.

The Mayor saitl neither was it a question of inoticy ny it ii the local bodies. It was a qtit-lioii of principle with them also, not to contribute towards a work wltiih should be done entirely by the Government. They would line it very diilicidt to discover a similar ease where the Govvrmiieiii had called upon local bodies for a contribution towards a work of that description.

The Minister said there was no precedent where the Government had done such a work wholly out of the funds of tin- colony. He was assured that was a case. The Government could do their Work without increasing the danger.

Mr. Bauine: '"I never heard that stated before."

The Mini-ter said the Government bad offered X !00fl towards the cost, of inak-

iiiu a one span bridge. They could do without it. but were willing to go to that extra cost to meet the wishes of the Auckland people, and make a really good job oi it, thereby doing away with the existing danger for which the present Government was uot responsible, as the pier- had been there for the I'/st 40 years. Mr. Bagnall suggested that the extra c.YOOwas not much additional for the Government io pay to make a really good job. and Ay away with the existing daii-

ger. The Minister r-aid ifc was urgently liecessarv that roads should be made in the back blocks. ■ The local bodies should rcaUy take the question of contributing as the stork poiilij Rw£%

held back much longer. He ivas quite willing to do what he could to make the contribution as small as possible, but the Government would not bear the whole cost of the alterations.

The .Mayor: "Can we take it, then, that the Government will not extend the existing piers?" The Minister: "No! You must not take that as being the case, for 1 only pointed out that wo could do the work without lengthening the piers'. It would, however, be a very peculiar looking bridge, one part with piers, and the other a single span. Yet we could do that at less cost than the £1000 we offer towards a single span bridge. - ' '

The M;ivor said he hoped the Government would not think of doing such a, thing as that suggested. The city had a first class engineer, and so had the Harbour Board." the idea being to do ,-nviiv abortionate jnhs. and he trusted the Government would not set the example by making a bridge that would Ibe neither one thing nor the other. The Mayor said that the small amount required to be contributed by the cily to remove would ensure the work beiug done properly. The Mayor asked the -Minister to go into the matter agaiu upon his return to Wellington, when he. would probably come io the conclusion that what the deputation asked was only reasonable. The Minister said it was not inf h' s Department, but he would make representations to the .Minister in charge of the Irishes of the deputntiou, aud was quite prepared to do all he could to get the matter further considered by the Ministry; but he thought it was his duty to give the deputation an idea of what the Government would do in the matter.