THE TRAMWAY LOAN.

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume II, Issue 103, 16 April 1912, Page 5

THE TRAMWAY LOAN.

MEETING AT THE PORT. A meeting was held at Port Ahuriri last night for the purpose of bringing together those who were desirous of promoting the carrying of the tramway loan of £lO.OOO tomorrow. The meeting was arranged to take place in the Port School and shortly after 8 p.m. about 50 people were assembled. The chair was taken by his Worship the Mayor (Mr. J. Vigor Brown) anti he briefly introduced the subject for discussion. He proceeded to make it clear that the loan asked for could not be di-' verted to any other purpose. If the poll went against the proposal tor the tranis and electric lighting it gould not be diierted. .i ■> the lau 1 - payets had been a'ked to inoi ’de the money for the tiams and th.it moiiex could not legalh I>e d:\erted to am other use. If the buses showed they would cost only half the price of the «ams the money could, neverthebs, not be un erted. If the poll for ,e trams weie lost some people thought they would get the buses, but this was not legal and if they voted against the trams Jiey would not consequently get ’buses . If they were unfortunate enough to vote against the trains the council would have to consider what was to be done It was his duty co make this clear. So long as they could have trams he would not support the municipalisation of ’buses. It would be necessary for the borough to conform to regulations as to running, to certain hours and in certain directions, and if a private company of - persons chose to run a ’bus service they could do so. In the case of private men running a ’bus it would be possible for them io attend to them themselves, but this was not so with the corporation. He would oppose ’buses personally. They might just as well run expresses, cabs or drays. He wished to make it plain that so far as the lean was concerned they could not go away from the trams. Cr. Crowley: Yes. and the lighting. Mr. Brown: Yes. and the lighting. He asked anyone to speak whether opposed to the trains or not. He > supposed those who were present were there to further the tram pell, but they had not the right to oppose anyone speaking. Mr. Crowley then took the floor. He said that since the inception of the tramway proposal he had been greatly interested in the question., and there had been no opposition in the council, and there had been no opposition until the last five or six weeks. Then it had come from a Spit resident. Mr. G. Nelson. While on the council Mr. Nelson had beer, in favour of the electric lighting and tramway scheme. His firm had applied to the council to extend the time for the closing of tenders. The council had met the i equest and put off the date for closing cf the tenders for a month. He knew of his own knowledge why the “Heraid ban started the agitation (ar.d he did not Car eopt.adictio.j). Mr. Nelson bad started the Herald ’ by saying it was not possible to carry out the scheme for the money and that .he alternative was the motor ’bus. The “Herald” had supported the motor ’bus but it had said nothing about the financial position at first. But when it found it was illegal to divert the money, it had turned to the question of finance. Touching on this point the speaker pointed oat that they had only asked for £30,000 which, divided amongst the population of the town, meant about £9 5per head. He also quoted from the letter which was published in these columns some days ago from Mr. R. L. Patterson, and he held that r. Patterson had made some valuable points as to the liabilities of householders. He pointed out that the trams were not to have a power of iheir Own. It was a combined scheme. If the electric light proposal went on it would have to have a power plant and staff of its own, but if they also had the trams they would have the same power arid staff for the two schemes. If not, neither would pay. If the electric light was run without the trams it would cost lid. per unit, with the trams it would cost 4-sd. per unit, or a reduction of 30 par cent. He then proceeded to show what the cost of electric light was in Dunedin, vvhere it was sold at sd. per unit. He illustrated a 12-rcomed house with an electric iron in that city which paid a very small levy. For the month of December thia house paid 22. January 3 9, February 3 7. In December ,2'6 was paid as a quarter’s rent for a meter. Napier had suggested 6d. . per unit and he held that Gd. per unit was equal to gas at 3 - per 1000. In Napier they paid 5,-, which was the cheapest in the colony. . Mr. Brown: No, Auckland is cheaper. Proceeding. Mr. Crow ley held that if they were paying 1C - for gas it meant they would pay 9- for electric light. If a rate were struck for the trams they would save it many times over. In one year the ratepayers would easily save in fares the rate they would have to pay. The cost of running a tram according to the engineering estimate was lOd. per mile, and the income 11. leaving a profit of 3d. In Auckland he believed they estimated the income at * 1/4 per mile. Our scheme could not be compared to Auckland, but Napier would be greater later on. The borough, he pointed out. would be a customer for electric light to the sum of £2500 per annum, and in addition there would be a saving in lighting, coke, etc. Wanganui trams had shown themselves to be self-support-ing where they had got no electric light. The conditions were no' so here, but thev would have the light. Ratepayers should think twic.before they voted against thi • scheme. They should am v;u against the scheme because ><• frothy agitators-who mostly owned motor cars — condemned it. <A woman: 1 hey had .’6 cars.) Mr. Crowley: Thanks. I can’t afford a car.” Continuing he said that these men did not care for the workers. Thev could not divert the money. The people wanted the trams because the council could not give them motor cars. Thev could not pick up a paper

which did not contain a record of an I accident with motor ’buses. The I London ‘ Times” had said the time had arrived when something must be dune to prevent these occurrences. What then would happen on Shakespeare road. He looked upon the “Herald’s'’ figures as wilful misrepresentation. One of the most important things to be considered was the sewerage. He pointed to the river which was controlled by a syndicate and said it would never do to discharge sewerage into stagnant water. The consequent loss of life would seriously have to be considered. Suppose the ratepayers . threw out the loan. The council could not accept the balance or use it for light alone : and suppose the court could prohibit such use of the t money. He then touched upon the .question of rates. He said Napier ] v. as one of the lowest rated towns in New Zealand (apart from the Harbour rate), and the debt per head in Napier was lower than it was in Waipawa. although they considered the additional loans. If they wanted Hastings to be the city and Napier the fishing village they should vote against the loan. If they wanted Napier not to go ahead vote against the loan, but if they wanted HastI ings to be the village and Napier to !go ahead they should vote for the I loan. Mr. R. L. Patterson was the next speaker, and he said it was news to most of them that the voting against the loan would not permit the council to divert the money to ’buses. He dealt briefly with the figures in his letter, and also quoted a recent cable from Lisbon to show that a motor ’bus accident had occurred, and he said they would not take their wives and families in motor ’buses in Napier. He also gave other illustrations of ’bus accidents as set-offs against tramway accidents. Electric tramways, he contended, had gone ahead, while motor 'buses had gone back. Perhaps some of them could remember rides in the motor ’buses at the Christchurch Exhibition, and they were not too good. There was sure to be a certain amount of convenience in the trams, and if they wished to proI grass they should vote for the loan I on Wednesday. Cr. McGrath, on being invited to speak, said he thought it was no for councillors now to discuss the question. If the ratepayers sanctioned the loan the work would be gone on with. The poll was virtually a referendum, and their stand as a council should be neutral. If the scheme could have been put through at the first cost it would have been gone on with. Mr. Black said it would take another £lO,OOO, while His Worship the Mayor advocated £25,000. They split the difference and asked for £15,000. Now they required £lO.OOO more, and it was for the ratepayers to say “Yes” or “No.” If they said yes it would be the duty oi the council to go on with the work. Some time ago he opposed the rail tramway and favoured the trackless system. Certainly the trams would not be a paying business for some time to come, but with the electric light and sew erage to help they would not have to pay 'much on the loss. But it was for them to save As a. councillor he felt that what the ratepayers said should be carried out. In reply to Mr. Martin as to whether the council could carry out any part of the scheme if the loan were rejected, the Mayor declined to give an opinion, but promised to get legal advice and place it before the public before the poll. Cr. Crowley stated that he had asked a solicitor his opinion, and it was that if the tramways were cut out of the loan proposals the ratepayers could apply to the Supreme Court for an injunction to stop the council from undertaking any minor work. The Judge would rule that they could not apply the money to a portion cf the scheme. Captain Widerstrom declared that there was not the. same keeness in the council over the trams as existed when members were first elected. Some people tried to throw the blame upon Mr. Black. But it was not his fault. The present scheme vv as not the scheme which was before the ratepayers three years ago. Electricty had gone ahead. What they heard about motor ’buses was “tommy rot.” He had heard what.it cost to keep a private motor car, and if it cost the Borough the same for a ’bus, God help the ratepayers. Cabs were a thing of the past, and something else had come. The cabmen, he thought, would not form themselves into a motor ’bus company. A few had taken to running motor cars, but it remained to be seen with what success. What they wanted was regular traffic which they could depend upon like clock work.

Mr. Martin said he could not see how the people at the Port could object to trams. If they come in by the e.xprcss train at night they could catch a (ram home, or they could depend upon a tram to catch the express in the morning. He moved :— “ That this meeting form itself into a committee to further the carrying of the loan on Wednesday.” Cr. Smith seconded the proposal. Touching upon tlie loan of £15,600. he pointed out that this was to secure an extension of the line to the Recreation Ground. Then no lighting had been provided for. except along the main track. Now they had arranged to light the whole borough. He then proceeded to show that by the time the tenders were opened the market had been disturbed belabour turmoil, and there was extra cost of production. This had been added to the cost. Then there was extra plant -pumping plant and sewerage plant was not in the original scheme, and on this the price had also advanced. V> hen tenders were opened tliev rcim.l th>>t wi mt enough money by seven or eight thousand, and that was what they now asked for. If the extra loan was not carried they could net spend anv money mi a miner scheme. If the loan was not carried £l6OO already expended would be wasted, and they would have nothing and have to start all over again. \o people were more interested than the Port residents. Thev had got to get to town. If they wanted an up-to-date system

they should vote ior the trams. If they could not have any other service they should vote for the trams. The motion was then put and carried.