HARBOUR BRIDGE.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 220, 17 September 1930, Page 9

HARBOUR BRIDGE.

COMPANY PLAN CRITICISED. "MAKING THING BIWCULOUS" NORTHCOTE! COUNCIL DIVIDED. £

. Exactly why the.Northcote Borough Council did not forward its' promised donatibn;of .£5 5/ to the Harbour Bridge Association revealed,'at a meeting of thp Notthcote .Bo;roughv,poimeil Y la?t evening. .The matter came up fov disX'ussidn C. J. W. ' ''Taylor'' said he thought the money should he sent. . M,r. Ar'/E. Gfeenslade, who is a member, of the executive of the association, said that the cheque had been held over because it had not been considered that the council was justified in donating to the funds of a; company which was .being formed in addition* to: the association proper. Since the bridge was first mentioned , Northcote had been strongly for tho ~ association/ and he thought, that the ..formation-, of. a company was a/niov.e.ih the '.Wrong direction." Anything, >vliich, wojild .'prejudice/, the chances, of:.the bridge he, was against,'; and the-council should look ahead to'.sed whether v jtwas;' wise: in supporting tlifl ; company.'- ':.•"■■■' .'[., l.'•:■.'. .<;•'■. ■ •■> / "Personally I thijik we are not doinga wise thing, in -making the matter ; public," said Mi\: Grceuslade. .''lt, is not going to do the bridge any good , and in^ ■ harming tho interests of the/association Northcote ie d.oing itself no good;" ■ The company had a ' nominal capital <*of< £5000 and on that amount it was going, I to.try and persuade the Government to glyo it a charter to built a millionpound bridge. It would , be a -wrong thing'to use the ratepayers' money iti furthering the interests of a company. The borough, as such, had no right to eniter the affairs of any company, and consequently; no business so.'to spend public money, i;' • . ■ Northcote Vitally Interested. • ; Considering the fact .that 1 ISTbrthcote had been chosen as the. eitc for the bridge on the northern shore, of the harbour, the borough was,< of all .local bodies, 'the most vitally'coiiceniecli arid particularly from the point of view of itown-'planning. All work done oh.the borough in that direction should be done withf a-'view to falling, in line 'with the requirements of the • bridge. - Whe.thei> it was 10 or 20 years ahead from that, aspect did not matter,'.. but 'Northcote did not want it to be retarded longer than necessary. -,'■'', t - ~ • "We, as a borough, should come out an,d take a stand ,;>n : matter," clared Mri H. J. 0/ He'agreed opinion of the Mayor-when'he decried the formation of a company. "The scheme- of the company is iriqre than absurd," , he ; said. -"It is pueriie, and it may damn the efforts which the, association has made in the past. Who ever heard of a' Government granting a building charter to a company with a capital'of £5000? It is making the thing look ridiculous. If , the council did not make a protest it would mean that it was tacitly supporting the propocsal." He moved that the cheque be sent, with a strong protest against the. action of tho company. •**"•• -^ Mr. P. C. Cross failed to see where the formation of a company entered into the discussion. The " simple fact was,' he 'said; that .tlie council had agreed to make a 'donation-of ■£5 5/i,r.ome ,three months' ago, and had hot yet' done so. ■ . Even though tho : council' ,1 had. ~;its; ; private opinion it should' ; have forwarded, the money. ''."■'■■ ;.'■'■ ■■: « Mr. P. AVilson agreed with Mr.'Cross.. "We owe them .'the'■money/ , he said, "and it does not seem right to withhold, it. Jjet them have it, and we can give them pur opinion after. It has been discussed at a full council. ■ . ■ The Mayor: WJiy liot let them have both a,t the same, time? .' Mr,"Wilson proposed.an amendment, that the money'be sent without an' attached comment. -After further die-' cuss'imv the amendment was carried by' a narrow'majority...";, .'; . V