WAIWAKAIHO BRIDGE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVII, Issue 122, 16 October 1914, Page 2

WAIWAKAIHO BRIDGE.

THE PROPOSED TOLL. BOROUGH COUNCIL'S PROTEST. The Borough Council has forwarded to the Minister for Public Works a very strong protest against the proposal of the County Council to erect a toll gate near Egmont Road in order to provide funds for the erection of a weir for protecting the Waiwakaiho bridge from the erosion which is threatening to undermine the piers. The protest sets forth that the bridge was, by agreement, vested in the county, and that the borough were to pay onefourth of the annual cost of maintenance and repairs. It is further stated that in June last the county undertook work at the bridge, and to pay for same increased the rate in the Waitara Riding by one 1 farthing, also that it is now proposed to expend £ 1500 on work in connection with the bridge. It iH pointed out that in order to finance "this comparatively small amount," the county proposes a double levy on the Waitara Riding—(a) by the farthing rate, and (b) by collection of tolls; also to make a double levy on the borough—(a) for one-fourth of the expense, and (b) by means of tolls, while the Government is to he asked to contribute onQ-third of the cost. On these grounds the borough contended that the application to establish a toll Bhould be viewed with the greatest suspicion. Moreover, tho borough submitted that consent to the application would be used as a lever to compel' the borough to contribute a larger sum than that provided for by tho agreement, as a paragraph in the county's letter enquired whether, under certain circumstances,.the borough would contribute one-half, instead of one-quar-ter of the cost, and the borough resented tho department being made use of in that manner.

The borough further objected to the toll gate on the following grounds:—

1. It was an obsolete method of collecting revenue; would impose hardships on the. resident's, and possibly create disturbances and brj-aches of the peace. 2. The object is not one contemplated by the Act. • 3. The toll gate is not necessary, as (a) a rate of l-5d in the ,C for one year on £2,161,458, the county value, would provide all the required sum. (b) Tho county is at present collecting %d in the £ in tlie V/aitara Riding for bridge works and culverts, producing £565, so it was contended that riding could provide the required 6um without a toll if that extra rate were collected for a further two years,

4. The whole of the increased rateable value of the county ( £133,608) was made in the Waitara Riding, so that the increased revenue of that riding rendered a toll gato unnecessary, the additional revenue (including tho extra rate) being £1607, available for the work, whereas the total expenditure was j only £ 1485.

5. That the borough's contribution f«r this work having been fixed by agreement, it would be unreasonable and inequitable to compel ratepayers to again contribute by means of a toll.

Finally, it was urged that if the. department should seriously consider the application, then that the borough should be heard by means of a deputation ,-before any definite decision was arrived at.