The Pahiatua Star. (Published Tuesdays and Fridays.) TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1890.

Pahiatua Star and Eketahuna Advertiser, Volume 5, Issue 412, 15 July 1890, Page 2

The Pahiatua Star. (Published Tuesdays and Fridays.) TUESDAY, JULY 15, 1890.

Thk North County Council have a decided liking for toll-gates, notwithstanding anything the members may say to the contrary. In the face of the fact that the Kketahuna Hoad Board has applied for the control of the main road in its district, the Council will not part with it; but, on the contrary, have determined to go on with the eroction of the toll-gate at Hawera. Now we maintain that the Kketahuna people should have a voice m this matter, as it is likely to atlect them in a very disagreeable way ; and their proposal that the county hand over the control of the road (together with license fees and rates) was a most reasonable one. If the Eketaliuna Hoad Board is prepared to relieve the county of the responsibility of maintaining the main road in its district, the Council should only lie too glad to get out of the difficulty m this way ; but they do not like parting with rates or license fees, as they know these will more than cover the expenditure required. The Council must have another monument of itsatupidity erected. The way has been pointed out by which this iniquitous system of blackmail may be avoided, but the North County Council shuts its ears to all appeals. We have always contended that this body had kept the Forty-Mile Bush districts back by bad administration, and this last act is another proof of it. Will the Kketahuna people tolerate it ?

Pahiatua has had her railway troubles as well as \\ oodville, and it will be in the recollection of those who were agitating that the line be brought on this side of the Mangataiuoka river (in fact through the centre of tile town) how a certain section of Woodville jieopla acted in the matter. They maintained that the ineiniwrs of the Woodville-Mangahao and Woodville-Mnngatninoka Special Settle, nients would be robbed of their rights if the I’ahiatua settlers succeeded in gaining their point. It never troubled these people in the slightest degree that a direct promise had been made to the pioneer settlers of this district that tile railway would at no distant date run pnst their doors ; and such a picture was painted of the future of Pahiatua at the first land sale by the then Commissioner ofCrowu Lands that those who took up laud had no doubts in their minds whatever that the railway would be taken anywhere else than down the three-chain road—reserved for the purpose. However, as the time went on, other influences were brought to hear on those in power, and to llieir disgrace the solemn promises made to the first settlers were snapped asunder. There are two things in connection with the recent Woodville agitation that strikes us as being somewhat remarkable. First, the discovery that the Gorge line is a fraud; and secondly, that distinct promises were made to the early settlers by Government that Woodville should he a railway terminus ef some importance. Possibly some such (iromise was made ; but like our case, no doubt it has been advantageous to break that promise. who took such s prominent part in urging the Government to break its pledges regarding the location of the line in this district surely have nothing to complain about; they must see that it is quite a simple matter u> put one class of settlers aside to please another. In next issue we shall have something further to say on Woodvilie’s woes.

At the meetiug of the North County Council on Thursday, a communication was received from the Kketahuna Koad Board requesting tiie Council to give them the control of the expenditure on the main road tn their district. It was resolved to reply that the Council cannot take anv actiou until a petition is submitted as protided by the Act. Section 247 of “ The Counties Act, 1886,” is the one referred to, and it reads :—“ On petition of not less than three-fifths of the ratepayers of any riding or ridings in a county, praying the County Council to declare any county road to be a district road, the Council shall, but not earlier than thirty days after the receipt of such petition (under section 81 of • The Public Works Act, 1882 ') declare by special order such county road to be a district road; but no such order shall be issued if the County Council shall receive from the rale|iayers of any part of the county a petition to the contrary effect of the first petition, signed by not fewer ratepayers of the county than the number

signing the previous petition." Section 81 of "The Public Works Act, 1882." reads:—“The County Council may make county roads throughout the county, except within the limits of a borough, and may by an order publicly notified from time to time declare any district road within the county Pi be a county road; and may, with the eonsenl of the Road Board, in a similar manner revoke such order, and on such revocation the road to which it relates shall again become a district road." In the Public Works Amendment Act of 1887 we find the following : “ Section 81 of • The Public Works Act--1882.’ is hereby amended by adding the following words al the and of such section —‘ The County Council may also, with tht consent of the ffo.li/ /hi rj within whose jurisdiction the sanu shall he, declare any county road to be a district road. - " According to nnr reading of these sections there is no necessity for a petition ; it seems to simply rest with the Hoad Hoard. Of course another interpretation may be put upon the sections.