THE PROTEST AGAINST THE KAIWARRA TOLL.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 810, 9 September 1887, Page 11

THE PROTEST AGAINST THE KAIWARRA TOLL.

MEETING OF RESIDENTS.. A meeting of those interested in the matter of testing the legality of the Kaiwarra toll was heldin tbeKniwarra schoolroom Monday night. There were about 30 persons present, and Mr Robert Stewart was voted to the chair. He explained the object of the meeting, and said it was for them to decide what action should be taken. As they were aware Mr Gai'dner had set the thing in motion by testing, the matter in the Resident Magistrate’s Court, but the decision had not yet been given. The solicitor engaged had intimated that the case would go against them, and if so, they could appeal. It was for them to consider whether they would try the matter in the Supreme Court, appeal, or let it drop altogether. Mr Howorth was still of the same opinion after searching the Acts that they had a very good case, and he considered the appeal would be decided in their favor. The sum of £ll 9s 6d had been collected, but it would take another £ll to take ths case before the Appeal Court. He then read a letter from Mr Howorth to the effect that he had seen Mr Wardell respecting the case, and that he had intimated that the decision would be in favor of the defendant, with leave for the plaintiff to appeal; this course being the only one which would relieve him of the responsibility of disturbing tho existing state of things, which, he considered, ought to be left to the Supreme Court. The writer further' stated that he was still of the opinion that the tolls were being illegally levied by the County Council. The power of the Superintendent had never been transmitted to that body, and the levying of tolls was entirely governed by the Public Works Act of 1876. In conclusion,Mr Howorth,”stated that if the matter could be arranged he would get the appeal heard at the earliest possible date. In answer to Mr Newton, the Chairman stated that it had been understood that the matter should cost £lO in the Resident Magistrate’s Court. Mr Newton said he understood that for that sum Mr Howorth had undertaken that the toll should be removed. Several residents said they did not understand that. Mr Newton thought it would be advisable to go on with the matter. Mr Nairn proposed, seconded by Mr .Dougherty that a committee of six residents should be formed to watch the ca3e, who should aot in the best interests of the ratepayers. He understood from Mr Izard that he was willing to do his best for them. A resident: Oh, its electioneering times—a man will say anything. Mr W. T. Wyatt thought they should go on with the matter. As they had gone so far, they should collect the extra money and see the matter out. If Mr Izard chose, he could do something for them afterward. Mr Bell, as an interested ratepayer, wished to know if the movement was for abolishing or the removal of the toll. He thought that if the toll was done away with, an extra rate would be struck, which would come very heavy on some of them. The Chairman said the movement was to abolish the toll from where it was. Of course they could not Bay where it would be put, but he thought that it would' not be put up again at all. Mr Bell thought the meeting ought to come to some terms with the County Council to lower the rate to onethird. He did not think the Kaiwarra people could be taxed so heavily for the road. Mr Wainwright said that several times they had tried to get the toll removed, but the County Council told them they would not remove it, and he would make one to subscribe toward going on with the case. (Hear, hear.) Mr Dougherty understood that the Council had rejected the matter from time to time, and he believed that it was on the Chairman’s casting vote. Mr Holmes moved that they should go on with the case. Mr Bergen seconded the motion. On being put, the motion was carried. The Chairman said that, as they had decided to go on withithe case, it would be necessary to consider the question of funds. He understood from; Mr Howorth that it would be necessary to lodge the sum of £lO with the solicitors on the other side as a guarantee for the costs. Mr Darrell said he had heard from a legal gentleman that they had set about the matter ; in the wrong way. They should have taken the question into Court and' asked for the removal of the toll. They could not dispute the toll. The Chairman said that if they had five or six solicitors, of course they would have five or six opinions. Mr Nairn said '>that once they had set the ball rolling they should not rest until they had got the toll out of that. (Hear, hear.) After some further conversation it was decided that a Committee, consisting of Messrs Littlejohn, Nairn, Taylor, Stewart, Gardner and Holmes, should be appointed to collect subscriptions, to work up and watch the case. The subscription list was laid on the table, and several residents put their names down for sums of money. The usual compliment to the chair terminated the proceedings.