The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. THURSDAY, JUNE 20, 1913.

Gisborne Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 4900, 20 June 1918, Page 4

The Gisborne Times PUBLISHED DAILY. THURSDAY, JUNE 20, 1913.

We must confess that we were surprised on account of The Hitch in the attitude of some the Tramway of the “City FathNegotiations. ers” on the tramway negotiations at Tuesday night’s meeting of the Borough Council. The negotiations, we think, have progressed fairly satisfactorily and we really cannot see why they should not result in an amicable arrangement being made between the Council and Mr. Lysnar. To our way of thinking the change that was evidenced in the views of some of the I Councillors is not explicable. Let | us take, for instance, the attitude that was adopted by Cr. Wauchop ; and Cr. Tucker at the latest meeting | of the Council. Cr. Wauchop moved j and- Cr. Tucker seconded an amend- J ment to the effect “that the Council i should fall in with the suggestion of j the Minister for Finance that this is not a suitable time for the expenditure of such, a large sum-on tramways.” Happily this .amendment was defeated. There is no good ground for the hostility of the Acting Minis- j ter for Finance in regard to the expenditure in question. It may be recalled that, the moneys in hand for the work were raised over two years ago and, despite the fact that the war was in progress the Minister for Finance (Sir Joseph Ward) did not raise any objection at all. It would be a very different matter if the money had not as yet been raised. But the amount which runs into over £21,000 is to-day merely on deposit with the Borough hankers and is earning in the way of interest much [ess than the amount which the ratepayers have to find yearly for the benefit of those who lent the uoney to the Borough. We think : hat these circumstances have only 10 be represented to the ActingrMin- ] ster for Finance when he will give ] 11 s. consent to the expenditure. 1 "lie “City Fathers” to whom ive have ? lluded will find it impossible to re- £ oncile their attitude at Tuesday’s t neetjng with' their expressions of r pinions at an earlier meeting at j t rhich this important matter was dis- J t ussed. For example it was*' Cr. . v

The Hitch in the Tramway Negotiations.

Wauchop who moved and Cr. Tucker who seconded a motion (at a .meeting held towards the end of last month) which read “that an agreement be drawn up,the basis of which shall be. as already agreed to by Mr. Lysnar and the terms shall be as prepared by the Borough solicitors and approved by Mr. Lysnar’s solicitors.” At the same meeting it was Cr. Wauchop who moved that Mr. Lysnar be thknked for his offer and his remarks met with unanimous support. What, then, is their explanation for wishing at the latest meeting to defeat the whole scheme ? Shorn of difficulties which*may never arise there is to-day not a great deal in the differences that have to be surmounted before the negotiations could ,be successfully concluded. > Mr. Lysnar has already given way on a number of matters that were in dispute and although we cannot do other than compliment tfle Borough solicitors on the care that theiy are exercising to safeguard the ratepayers/ interests, we confidently believe that it is still possible to bring the negotiations to a satisfactory termination. Boiled down, the questions at issue revolve around the following matters—

(a) Preparation of plans and -specifications. (b) Insistence of retention of 2b per cent, of contract money. (c) Completion of Order No f; at anyrate m regards Grey Street., (d) Stipulations as to the light to abandon if onerous conditions are imposed by the Department or for any other reason. (e) Obtaining order before making any delegation. (f) Advisablity of applying for limited Order only; (g) Consideration of time for completion, and (h) Consent of Finance Minister.

It might weary our readers if we attempted to discuss these matters in great detail. As regards the plans and specifications the Borough solicitors claim that these should be prepared by the Borough’s own engineer. Mr. Lysnar replies that the principles of the work should be decided by the State Engineer-in-Chief and himself, and that he will have no objection to the Borough engineer drawing up the details. The ratepayers, we think, will appreciate the- point that in any event the work* will not be allowed to proceed until Mr. Holmes is satisfied with the proposed specifications. As to the question about the retention of portion of the moneys for a stipulated period as a protection to the Council Mr. Lysnar says he is prepared to let the matter stand as desired by the Borough solicitors, but

if it is found necessary to carry out the work by day labor (which he hopes will not be the case) he will trust the Council to deal with the point in a reasonable spirit. The next item is the contention by the Borough solicitors that the Grey Street route should form portion of the work. It is no doubt the case that the Order-in-Council already granted provides, inter alia, for this particular route. As things stand the proposed new Order-in-Council will have to provide for extensions in the case of the Mangapapa route and of the line to serve the Park and will i also make provision for the "Wainui ; route which Mr. Lysnar now proposes shall be of greater length than ; was ever before suggested. We are ' not disputing the Borough solicitors’ contention that it is incumbent on i the Council to construct the Grey j Street route. But there is a simple , way out of the difficulty. In fair- ! ness to Mr. Lysnar the point should ■ be stressed that he has all along ob- ; jccted to include this route in his ■' scheme, and the “City Fathers” must be well aware of that fact. Let the Council, therefore, do as Mr Lysnar suggests—the borough to provide the cost of this particular work and a further car and run this section itself without affecting Mr. Lysnar’s proposed agreement with the Council. Nobody can suggest that in what Mr. Lysnar has offered to do, leaving out of consideration the Grey Street route, he has not offered the borough a princely bargain. Item No. 4 seems to be of a most interesting character and requires vertcareful handling. It may be pointed out that Mr. Lysnar claims the right to determine the whole business if the Council does not within twelve months put the bridges in order for tramway purposes. On their part the Borough solicitors suggest that the Council should retain the right to cancel the irNnded delegation if for any reason (such as the Depart- j ment insisting upon terms involving , any expenditure which the Council j cannot incur or does not feel justified J in incurring) it becomes inexpedient ! to proceed with the work. The dis- i pute works down to this: Mr, Lysnar i is prepared to take the risk as to the amount of work he- will be required to perform under the Order-in-Coun-cil,aud in accordance with the plans and specifications as they stand after review by the Public Works Department. But the Borough solicitors apparently fear that the Department may require the Council to effect repairs and alterations to the bridges far in excess of what the “City Fa tilers” may have in mind. In this regard we merely wish to suggest that if Mr. Lysnar is willing to accept the risks which he has offered to take the “City Fathers” could not be blamed if they adopted a similar sporting spirit. This journal feels certain that the public will agree that Mr. Lysnar has offered to carry what will prove the heavier end o: the stick. In the matter of whether the Order-in-Council should come j before the delegation the Borough | solicitors suggest that the Ordev-in-Couacil be obtained first and Mr Lysnar replies that the delegation should be made at once and be subject to the Order-in-Council being obtained. As to ..the question afcou* the length of the Wainui route Mr Lysnar "would be under contract to lay the whole of the rails in stock, and. if he is compelled to carry out the other routes before lie does tlm Wainui route, ive think, the Council would meet him fairly if there were no moneys over to enable him to take the Wainui line as far as the Han manatua creek. Regarding the other points raised by the Borough soW tors Mr. Lysnar offers no objectionsWe' would, therefore, be plea so j to see the Mayor, in conjunction with the Borough solicitors, continue the negotiations with Mr. Lysnar for we think it would he a great pity if at this advanced stage the negotiations were to fall through.