STREET PLANTING.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XXXIX, Issue 12285, 11 July 1914, Page 1

STREET PLANTING.

ft-o tlio Editor. ... Sir, —I. was pelased to set - , by the letter ol J)r Douglas, tlie President of ■ the Beautifying Tioe.iely, that lie has thought lit no longer to iguore the rather noisy objections that arc being raised by a small section of the ratepayers to the street-planting in Thames :• Street. It is probft-hlc that these objection*. uoiild have been result-less in ain Case, even hittl he. continued 1o ' iimore thcui, for It. is incredible that - Llie Council,; after Raving deliberately incurred au Expenditure with a view to .benefitting the town, would allow itself to be so far inliuenced by the protests -and threats of a noisy few sis to destroy -work dono without waiting for time to show whether it is beneficial or usurious. Time enough to uproot or cut down the trees it and when they Iprovo themselves » nuisance. Al- • though, therefore, Dr Doi|gla.s'' letter may not have been actually needed, ,it seems only fair to. the Council that its hands should be strengthened by proot Unit a majority s -of the ratepayers—at linyrat-e a majority of the. more thoughtful— very decidedly approve of and appreciate tile work done. The arguments advanced by.the objectors might, indeed would, have some point in litem in regard to a. street. one-half or eveu two-thirds ol the-'width of Thames street, but with .reference-to Thames street they have 110 applieation at all. The only object of having a two-chain street is to afford opportunity of beautifying it. If this is not done its width, for- trafhe and almost all other purposes, is a positive nuisance. Vehicles meander zig-zag fashion all over it, and it remains what Thames street always has been, and if the objectors could have tlicir way always will be, a, wide, dull, dusky, dreary waste. . The Council must not forget, if they ever do again .consider the objections raised by some, of the Thames street business people, that they are- by lio means air who have to be considered. It- is not the business people, of Thames street who alone use the street. It 's the ilia in promenade of Oamaru, and the business people who have, there their, shops or places of business torpi a very small proportion of those who use the street. If, therefore, the question is to-become one merely of aesthetic taste, it must be remembered that alt the inhabitants of Oaniaru have to be considered, not the residents , n 'Thames street alone. ~ The idea that the wishes of a majority of the residents iu the business centre of the town should be considered with reference to a- matter of this kind, in preference to those of- tlio bulk of the- inhabitants, seems to me to be entirely unreasonable, more especially if the* wishes of the- . former are ■obviously parochial and short-sighted. — 1 am, etc., , SPECTATOR.