REMOVAL OF HILL

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXV, Issue 22983, 10 March 1938, Page 13

REMOVAL OF HILL

HAMILTON PROPOSAL LOAN POLL NEXT MONTH HIiATED COUNCIL DEBATE ' 4 •>[BY 'fELEGRATH —OWlff CpRBESFONDENI] j HAM3&TDn, Wednesday A poll over a special rating area ,'formedby 4li© .iaaifl business section of Hamilton adjoining the Garden Place Hill is to be taken' on April 11 on the question of £77,000 for the removal of the hill and tho provision of an additional shopping and commercial area. A decision to this effect was made at a meeting of the Hamilton Borough Council to-night. Tho original proposal was for a loan of £89,000 over the whole of the borough. This plan was - defeated at a poll last April. The council decided to ask tho Post-master-General, the Hon. F. Jones, to withhold the letting of tho contract for the new post office until after the poll had been taken, in order that the question of a site could bo further considered should the poll bo carried. This proposal was introduced by Mr. J. E. Tidd, who said there were advantages which made the originally proposed location for tho post office, on the other side of Victoria Street, more desirable than ever. Acrimonious discussion followed the introduction of tho mojtion. Mr. C. Laffertv challenged those directly or indirectly interested in tho scheme to vote. He also alleged, that Mr. Tidd went into office stating that not a shovelful of the hill would be removed. " Mr. Tidd: If that can bo proved, I will give £SO to any charity in the town. Mr. Lafferty: I will take his challenge, and I hope he will pay it when it is proved. The motion was carried, the only dissentients being the deputy-mayor, Mr. H. D. Caro, Mr. Lafferty and Mr. W. W. Dillicar. Subsequently Mr. Dillicar moved that any further action for the removal of tho hill bo deferred until after the municipal election. Seconding the motion, Mr. Caro said he was in favour of .removing the hill, , but only by constitutional methods. The Mayor, Mr. J. it. Fow said ho was satisfied that the council had done the right thing. The traffic problem and the desirability of obtaining a better site for the proposed post office gave urgency to the question. Mr, Dillicar's motion was lost, the division being tho-same as on the pre- @ vious motion.