THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE ON THE GARDENS QUESTION.

Evening Star, Issue 12162, 5 April 1904, Page 3

THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE ON THE GARDENS QUESTION.

TO THE EDITOR. Shy—l_ voted to give Mr Brown an opportunity of voting upon this question, and he repays it by saying the "ratepayera inusl beware" of my candidature for the mayoralty. I am to be pilloried for honestly expressing myself against the Gardens route. i could have understood Mr Brown had I wanted to deprive him of voting upon the question. I seconded Cr Lawrence's motion to enable the people to be educated upon the matter with a view of giving such a vote as would be an object lesson to the rising generation that on no account whatever should our reserves bo unnecessarily alienated, and my speech at the time shows I intended to oppose such alienation. Three routes are suggested—first, through the centre; second, a detour to the right and along Lindsay's Greek; third, a curve to_ the left, behind the brewery and along King street The brewery route is the least objectionable, but a branch from Howe street along King street would obviate it. The centre route would cut the Gardens in half, and the fence on both sides of the track would be an unmitigated obstruction. The fence obstruction would also apply to Lindsay's Creek, and both it and the centre route would destroy the safety and quietness of the Gardens. The music, too, at night so charmingly described by Or Lawrence would hardly harmonise with the music of the trams, and the Gardens can be lit up with electricity without the trams going through. However, if the trams must go through, the centre route is the best. But " Hands off.'" I say. Can the ratepayers of ttrip City afford to mako another route to the Valley? Certainly not. Even Cr Lawrence admits it is " already well •served," though Mr Brown says it is not. Only 5 per cent, of the revenue is derived from the Valley; the other 95 ,per cent, ia from the City. Yet we send every George and Castle street tram from Howe street to the V«o«—raamr of them empty-1 Now the

Howe street connection was designed to save tiiis. In other -words, there was to have been a town circuit via Howe street to tap the town traffic only without going to the Vai£ey, the Valley traffic to be tapped as well as it is now by running just a sufficient number of trams. Mr Brown would remove this ch-cnit to the Valley, and compel us to perpetuate the waste I refer to. But Cr Lawrence wonld not take up the Howe street connection, I leave these gentlemen to reconcile their differences.

And I cannot see what revenue the Gardens route will pick up that is not nicked up now. The people must travel by George or Castle street, and if they go to the Gardens thev get to the Gardens gate in the one case and within a stone's throw of the Gardens bridge in the other. Some people want a tram to their front and back doors, and upstairs as- well. Had the Gardens been a park several miles in length and breadth one could have understood the agitation to take a tram into the centre of them; but to plank a tram into the centre of our present Gardens is ridiculous. I am as anxious as- Cr Lawrence to benefit the people north of Frederick street and this side of the Gardens, but will a single line, which is all he proposes to put through, do it? No; the present single line in Castle street is only capable of a ten-minutes' service, and it is this now. Another loop will give a quicker service, bnt this can be done without going through the Gardens The fact is the people patronise the Georgo street route because it has a two and a-haif minutes' service, and it goes right through the heart of the City to the main shops "and business places, just where the people want to go, and this would be tho case, Gardens or no Gardens. Overcrowding can be stopped b\- miming more trams at certain times. My idea of a double line in Castle and Howe streets. joining .with the double line in George street, thus forming a town circuit without going to the Valley, would give as quick a service in Castle street as in George street, and is the only way to benefit those north of Frederick street and south of the Gardens. liut will it pay? Hence, as tho "Valley people are already well served," and as no quicker service can be had in Castle street unless we double the line, or add another loop—and, I repeat, this can be done without going through the Gardens—and as no additional revenue can be derived from the Gardens route, why waste time and money over it? First finish what we -have in hand. Mr M'lndoe's analogies are not logical. There was a dire necessity to connect Princes and George streets, tho main thoroughfare of the City, in a straight line through the Oetagonj but there is no necessity to put three streets to the Valley —King, George, and now the Castle street extension—where only King street a short time ago existed. This is a wholesale alienation of the public reserves. Then Mr Mlndoe argues that because Castle street through the Gardens is shown on some old plan therefore it should be put through. He might as well argue that because King and George streets from their respective bridges to the Valley are not shown on this plan therefore they should be closed! By universal consent and usage they have become public roads, and the Gardens have become public Gardens, and any attempt to alter this must meet with considerable opposition. I admit the more direct route for Castle street is through the Gardens, just as the more direct route from one part of London to another is through Hyde, St. James's, or Regent Parks; but Britishers would not think of sending a. tram or a train through, and we should be as jealous of our rights. Before the Castle street line was decided, I was then a young member of the Council, and asked if a double line would not be better, and was told it would not pay, and that it was only required as far as the new railway station. The first day I rode on the line I knew tlus was a mistake. _ The loops and their delays when time is everything are exasperating, and drive people into the George street trams; and, I repeat, this would be the case with a single line through the Gardens. To guide the people, let Mr Goodman report on the whole matter from an expert point of view, and Mr Tarmock from an aesthetic.

I recently went to the G;irdens. I saw children playing everywhere freely and joyously, their mothers at homo having no anxiety on their account, knowing there was at least one beautiful, level spot in this City where their little ones were absolutely free from danger. I asked three old gentlemen, one of them unfortunately blind, who were sitting under a beautiful tree and basking in the sunshine just where the proposed tram track lay, what they thought of the trams through the Gardens. With one voice thev appealed to ™ ' , nofc to convert the Gardens into a bustling, noisy, dangerous place, with an obstructive fence in the centre ; and when the ultimate object is to put a street trough, I believe the people when roused wfl say: "Gentlemen, you must not touch one mch of the Gardens for tramway purposes- I respect those v ho differ from me, and I venture to hope they will think none the less of me foAonesUy decW my convictions.—l am, etc., April 5 Joseph Bbatthwaite. P.S—The double lined circuit via Howe street wdl also benefit the VaHeyT-J B