Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

A CRITICISM AND A REPLY

TO THE EDITOR. '■ Sir, —On Wednesday next, 27th September, the Aliramar ratepayers aro invited by advertisement to vote between 9 a.m. and 7 p.m. for or against a loan of £4500 for the "protection and improvement of Marine-parade." Just so! But kindly let me recount the results of former loans which we, in our innocent trustfulness, voted for. There was the great tramway loan: result, a large annual loss to the borough. A few alert motor 'buses would have served the district's requirements better and at a tenth part of the cost. The large sewerage loan next. Well, the nightsoil cart still rumbles along my road on Sunday evenings, although the thoroughfare is sewer-laid throughout. The council has power to enforce house drainage. Why is it not done? Then came the powerhouse scheme. Something wrong there! The main engine is sold and throbs the sea air no more. Yet we, who voted for it, were promised a home-made electric-light powerful enough to set us all blinking. The large almost-unused building is. a full-sized white elephant. The town hall came! Where is it? Down a grass-grown side street, hard to find and rarely used. Some years ago we had a tree-planting fever; planted hundreds, spent hundreds. All wasted! The trees can't see daylight through the dense weed growth. *No, sir, I'm not going to vote 'for the Parade improvement project. Let the borough workmen tumble into the sea erosion some cartloads of heavy boulders.. Better that way than our £4500. Whose fault is it that the erosion was not coped with at the beginning? Now, Miramar folk, go and vote against the loan. Th<- rates have gone up by leaps and bounds, and we are not getting value for money. What's wrong with the amalgamation? Ninety per cent, of us earn our money in Wellington, and spend it there too. Where's the good of running our little side show when such a big exhibition is alongside it. Council following council has fed us up with rosy talk of the big future before our wonderful borough, but the bigness is still in the rosy future. Knock this loan on the head, and then go in heart and brain for amalgamation with the city, is the advice of

A TEN YEARS' RESIDENT. 23rd September.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/EP19160925.2.67.1

Bibliographic details

Evening Post, Volume XCII, Issue 74, 25 September 1916, Page 8

Word Count
386

A CRITICISM AND A REPLY Evening Post, Volume XCII, Issue 74, 25 September 1916, Page 8

A CRITICISM AND A REPLY Evening Post, Volume XCII, Issue 74, 25 September 1916, Page 8

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert