ELGIN ROAD TRAM LINE

Evening Star, Issue 16515, 29 August 1917, Page 8

ELGIN ROAD TRAM LINE

COMMISSION OF INQUIRY. Mr J. R. Bartholomew, S.M. (appointed by the Governor as a Commission to inquire into the objections raised to the removal of the Elgin road tram rails, Mornington, for the purpose of using them on the Maryhill line), heard further evidence after we went to press yesterday afternoon. Mr G. A. Lewin (Town Clerk) represnted the City Council, and Mr E. E. Nioolson the objectors. George William Henick, living at the far end of the Elgin road district, stid that the want of transit was severely felt by the residents there. A considerable amount of building took place when the tram was started. The stopping of the tram had affected building operations. Mr Nicolson said he had questions to ask on the reports received by the City Council. He wanted to know if there was sufficient material obtainable from Elgin road to meet their requirements. Theu, supposing there was the material there to put- Maryhill in running order, was there sufficient power at ,the engine sheds to meet the extra haulage? He understood that the condition of the engines was such that it was a. question whether there was sufficient power at the engine sheds. Then he wanted to know if the council had a . report as to the suitability of a Thomas transmission coach for Elgin road, and whether the Public Works Department would allow them to run such a coach, and, if so, whether it could be run on the present rails. Mr Bartholomew said he intended calling on the Town Clerk to call expert engineering evidence to show what was involved by the lifting of the Elgin road rails. He wanted to be satisfied on expert | evidence that the removal of these rails i would result in the establishment of a proper Maryhill ( service. With regard to j the Thomas transmission tar, he did not j think it neoessary to carry that matter any further, because Mr Alexander (tramways manager) said that such a car could be run on the present rails. Edward E- Nicolson then gave evidence. He said that the objectors had mapped out the area served by the Maryhill and Elgin road lines. The number of houses in the district served by the Maryhill line was 183 houses, and in the Elgin road line 352 houses. The route of the Maryhill line went down a steep hill and up a rise at the far end. On this route there were only 24 houses; whereas on the Elgin road route, taking the of the hill, there were 82 houses. During the first year, when both lines were running, the recorded takings on the Maryhill line were £4Ol 15s sd, and on Elgin road £484 6s lOd. They were glad to see Maryhill have a line, but they did not want the residents there to have it at the expense of Elgin road.

Walter Alexander Scott, chairman of the Tramways Committee of the City [ Council, called by Mr Nicolson, said he did not wish, to express any personal opinion at variance to the decision come to by the council. Mr Bartholomew said it would not be fair to ask witness to answer such, a question. The witness said that none of the officers of the council bad given expression to the opinion that either of the roufe3 was a commercial proposition. Even with the rails taken up at Elgin road they could not be sure that they could complete the Maryhill line, as other materials might be required, and might not be obtainable. Mr Lewin said that all reports would be handed to the Commission for perusal. He was sure that there was quite an erroneous opinion about what these reports contained. Mr Bnrtholomew then said he would adjourn the inquiry to give the Maryhill people an opportunity of expressing their views, and also to allow Mr Lewin to call the expert evidence. He intimated that he would have a look over both lines before the Commission resumed the following afternoon.