GREATER GISBORNE.

Gisborne Times, Volume VI, Issue 169, 29 July 1901, Page 3

GREATER GISBORNE.

(To the Editor of the Times.) Sid, —Will you kindly find space in your 1 columns for the following remarks on the aspect of this important question, as it presents itself to me : Wc are asked to consider the advisability or otherwise of amalgamating with the Borough of Gisborne. Many reasons have been adduced why it would be to the advantage of both the Whataupoko and Kaiti Road Board Districts that a certain area of each should be included in the Borough. For my part, having given the matter very careful consideration, I am of opinion that it would not only be a wise and judicious step, but it will be found to be a very necessary one. Now, Sir, is what we are asked to consider a luxury or a necessity ? What I understand a luxury to be is indulging in anything that is not required in our daily routine of life, or going in for something that we can do without. We cannot say that we can manage much longer without a proper system of water and drainage, and as there is no prospect of our being enabled within any appreciable time to provide within ourselves these things, it cannot be said that we are advocating luxuries. There can be no doubt as to the necessity of water and drainage. We have only to look back for a few months, to find out why it is a necessity. I refer to tho loss of young lives by that awful fever, the existence of which solely depends on bad water and no drainage. Now, Sir, there are two views to take of the question, the philanthropic or Christian view, and the business or £ s. d. view. The philanthropic or Christian view is that which appeals to our better nature, and urges us to endeavor, by all means, oven at a sacrifice, to safeguard those growing up around us, and remove everything that may be dangerous to their health. Surely such a view is well worth considering. Now tho £ s. d. view appeals to those of us who are of a sordid nature, and who look at everything in a business light and as to how it will affect our pockets. Is it not a fact that within the past two or three years the value of property on the Whataupoko side of the river has gone up from 20 to 40 per oent. Why ? I unhesitatingly say mainly owing to the healthy situation and the sparse population. But how long will this last? If history repeats itself, as it assuredly will do, and we have a 1 repetition next summer of the fever which unfortunately raged last year and carried off ! both old and young, and the stigma oast on ■ our fair district aggravated, then a deterioration of values will set in, which will not only affect the Borough, but will extend its tentacles to the suburbs, and we sordid ones will find ourselves mulcted in a sum in one fell swoop, equal to, if not more, than any extra rate we might have to pay in connection with a system of water and drainage for the remainder of our lives, which arc heavily I discounted so long as wo continue to use bad water and have no drainage. But on tho 1 other hand, Sir, we sordid ones, when one of < the family is stricken down by sickness, do i not hesitate for a moment to send for medical 1 advice, in many cases at considerable expense, I and which malady in all probability would not have occurred had the patient not been . compelled io drink impure water and inhale noxious odors, and introduce into the system baccili and other germs of disease, owing to. want of drainage. And, sir, if we have a vacant piece of land adjoining our residences, over-run with noxious weeds, we immediately, either by our own exertions, or by payment of labor, remove the nuisance, so that we may get the full benefit of the land. Is not the indiscriminate emptying of slops in the vicinity of our homes in tho same category ? ' Why should we not, then, at a small cost, assist to remove that which affects our health, aye, our vitality, a matter far and ] away of more consequenco to us than our

pockets? The question to my mind, sir, is not one of what it is going to cost us, but as to whether we are to go on growing in importance as a district, or to go backward. Are we, the outlet, to make a retrograde step or even remain stationary while the country districts are increasing in prosperity by leap 3 and bounds? Are we to have a Borough with some 2000 to 3000 inhabitants, while it is in our power to have a city with a population of 5000, thus enhancing our social status, bringing us under notice as a prosperous community, enlarging our powers of finance, and generally elevating us from a position of obscurity to one of marked prominence? And the only argument yeti brought forward by the opponents of amalgamation is that it will touch their pockets, in a slight degree. I have shown that the water and drainage question is an absolute necessity. It cannot be taken in hand by the Borough as it is at present. An inadequate system would be worse than useless, and the cost of a complete one, without amalgamation, would be prohibitive, and the Borough Council, if it is sincere in its desire for the consummation of

these most important matters, dare not raise obstacles in the way of amalgamation, but will accept the conditions as contained in the resolutions passed at a meeting of the combined Boad Boards, which, while they are not antagonistic or injurious financially or otherwise to the interests of the Borough, carefully safeguard the existing privileges of the two road districts, and at the same time give them advantages which they do not now enjoy in their present position, and in conclusion, I would venture to add, if the ratepayers of Whataupoko are true to their interests, whether social, public, or private, they would do well to pause before they allow a problematical increase in their rates to cause them to view with disfavor a proposition which, if given effect to, can only tend to their advantage.—l am, elc., Charles W. Ferris.

Whaiaupoko, July 29, 1901. |