STREET WIDENING IN SOUTH DUNEDIN

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21669, 13 June 1932, Page 8

STREET WIDENING IN SOUTH DUNEDIN

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —In this morning’s issue you publish a letter from Mr P. W. ShackloCk on the above subject. Referring to some street widening propositions of his he says: “I have offered a large sum of money to make these improvements.” Will Mr Shaeklock state the sum lie has offered and the authority to which he has offered it? I put these direct questions to him because as the result of my inquiries i am unable to obtain corroboration of the statement. — I am, etc., Interested. Juno 11. to the editor. Sir, —Several letters have appeared in your paper with reference to the widening of streets in South Dunedin, and one from Mr Charles\ Edwards appears to me to carry with 'it an insinuation that if people are trying to improve things, they have an ulterior motive. 1 live in Glasgow street, and I am about there all, day. The children have nowhere else to play except in the street, and after school hours crowds of them are there. That a serious accident has never occurred is something we ought to be grateful for. When it does happen, some questions will he asked. Less than 30 feet wide, footpaths included, with several condemned houses —this is a street that would be called a slum anywhere else. Some of the motor lorries have to back over the footpath to enable them to turn. Advantage should be taken of Mr Shacklock’s offer. Once a start was made we have no idea where the end would be. — I am, etc., ' Resident. Glasgow street. June 10. to the editor. Sir, —Your correspondent, Mr P. W. Shaeklock appears to possess that peculiar mentality which can see but one side of a question (his own). All who disagree with him are fools or worse. Witness the wild talk he gave us some time ago on the subject of rating on unimproved values. He also indulges in half-truths, that most difficult process on which to argue. With no intention of entering into a controversy with him, let me just write a few lines. He is very insistent about the matter of Grosvenor street, making the assertion that the land required for widening could be obtained for some £I4OO. 1 suggest that if he is in earnest he obtain options from the owners for the purpose of acquiring the land necessary for this proposal, and for the cost of removing their homes. There are only 22 concerned. 1 ignore the fact that his own fine property has a frontage to this street. His attack upon the members of the Unemployment Committee is of all things the most ungracious. These men have fdr the best part of two years given their time and thought in the way of helping in a very difficult problem, meeting daily in the early stages. Their powers are strictly limited, and every penny spent is subject to the strictest scrutiny. If they have been less liberal than the circumstances would appear to warrant, it has been because of those limitations. And now this gentleman, who would so easily set everything right, charges them with the misapplication of the funds, being ignorant probably of the fact that every payment has to be certified by a Government official His figures about the two properties he instances are all wrong, and his statement about the position- just one of those hajf-truths to which he is so addicted. —I am, etc., • Fair Plat.