FENDALTON TRAM EXTENSION.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 12849, 6 July 1907, Page 2

FENDALTON TRAM EXTENSION.

TO THE EDITOR OP "THE TRESS." gj r> —Mr James F. Taylor again rushes into the fray with a recklessness that ie even more amusing than Mβ first effort; fortified with figures and estimated that we ludicrous in tho extreme. Ho first of all makes the misstatement that the actual distance of road formation is 15 chains, not 20 chains, but 1 would point out to him that he must measure from tho Fendalton road, and not from Hanmer's road, an it is absurd to think that anyone would construct a tramline round the acute angle in front of Mr Stringer's gate. Mr Taylor states that the cost of formation, channelling, asphalting and metalling will not bo more than £20 per chain. Evidently he is not aware nis estimate is absurd. I expect to be calling tenders for the formation of twenty chaine of reading, etc., next itnonth, naar the took of Colombo street, and I make Mr Jeinee F. Taylor the offer of carrying out my work. I will be prepared to pay him £30 per chain, and then he will loee money on hie contract, and I defy anyone to carry out the work required in. this respect for the proposed Bryndwr route at less than £35 per chain. J notice Mr Taylor has preserved a discreet silence on the question of the cost of tha land to be acquired, namely, two ecree, and I would eek him why he omitted to mention this in his last letter. I think the real reason is because he found my estimate with re gard to the nurchnee of the necessary land* was underestimated, if anything, He state* in his previous letter that the proposed route wa» to acquire a section of Mr Cuddon's, and then proceed over Wairarapa stream through Mr Cole's property. I pointed out in reply that thie was impracticable, as Mr Cuddon's section and Mr Cole's I property were not actually opposite one another, and Meesra James Taylor and party have discovered that I was only too correct to making thie assertion. To attempt to get over the matter, Messrs Taylor and party proposed to purchase Mr Burne'e half-acre section adjoining Mr Cuddon's. Mr Burns is asking £500 for his half-acre, and if tho other owners are asking at the same rate, tho residents of Fendalton can easily perceive that the two acres required will cost £2000, oi double my eetimate in my -last letter. In connection with tho cost of tho land to bo acquired, I would like to ask Mr James what will be the cost of that portion of Mr Cole's property necessary for the proposed Bryndwr route. 1 ask this question for the reason that one or two ratepayers have tried to ascertain from Mr James Taylor the pnc& Mr Coles has placed upon this property, but Mr Taylor's only answer is to the effect that the matter is c secret. Mr Taylor might pardon mc if I inform him that the ratepayers do not require to have any seorete of this character, fio much for the cost of the land. r With regard , to the cost of the pro. posed bridge, Mr Taylor's estimate ie i.doo, and in making such a statement ho must think that the ratepayers oJ Upper Fendalton are lacking in intelligence if ho wishes them to believe this absurd eslimate. I state again that my estimate of £650 is much nearer the mark, and after inspecting the width of the street at this point, I am doubtful whether anyone could build a bridge at even like the price I have stated. I have no hesitation in saying that it is impossible for Mr Taylor, or anyone else, to get this bridge built at anything less than £650, and if the residents of Fendalton will inspect the proposed site as I have done, I feel sure they willconcur with my remarks. I again assert that the original idea was to secure land from Mr Stringer. Mr Joseph Taylor mentioned it to one or two ratepayers, and I am prepared ti give him their names. Mr Taylor states that the mere handful I spoke of represents 100 ratepayers, but I would ask him, are they all ratepayers, or is he obtaining signatures to tho" petition which have no right to appear thereon P Already, so I am informed, several ratepayers who signed the petition under a misapprehension, have written to Messrs Taylor and party, or the Christchurch Tramway Board, to have their names deleted from it, and when others discover that their rates will bo doubled on the proposed Bryndwr route I feel sure that the names left on Messrs Taylor and Son's petition will be but a very small portion of the ratepayers in the Upper Fendalton District. In conclusion, I need only repeat that the proposed Bryndwr route will cost just about double the Fendalton Road route, in addition to which it will prove unprofitable as compared with the latter, which is the only road that tho coaches found to be payable in the district.—Yours, etc., RONALD 0. DUXCAN. I July 2nd, 1907.