ACCESS TO ROSENEATH

Evening Post, Volume CVII, Issue 79, 2 April 1924, Page 8

ACCESS TO ROSENEATH

A correspondent (R. W. Burhidge) has written -on- the- much-discussed question of access to < H'oseneath. Mr. Burbidge says :—: .

'.'A very- sensible rletter . appears in your issue.of 26th over the signature of James E. ■ Fulton', the ■ well-known engineer, advocating the same principles our association is fighting for, namely, protesting against the ' expenditure of £10,000 incurring an annual loss of over £1000 per: annum, wien other schemes are available, which would pay interest from the ■ start, and would increase, in later years, beside serving the needs of Roseneath better. This is a question that should interest all ratepayers and citizens of Wellington', as they will have to make up the deficiency by further increased rates. I was disappointed on returningto Wellington to find the council had adopted the inclined tram scheme, and I cannot understand the council not taking the sensible proposal of. Councillor Thompson to inspect the locality and the different schemes before "voting on the question. One councillor v made the remark that as other lines of tramsways did not pay another loss would not matter. If that gentleman conducted his private business on these same lines he would soon he before the Official Assignee. If this was a private business enterprise ■ entailing an expenditure of £10,000 and an • annual loss of over £1000. per' annum, those same councillors would have wanted all particulars' and i*"jn thoroughly conversant with the locality before embarking on the undertaking. If this is so for their private business, why not so for the city's business, of which they are trustees?"