FENCOURT-GORDON ROAD.

Waikato Argus, Volume IX, Issue 768, 1 October 1900, Page 2

FENCOURT-GORDON ROAD.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—Will you allow me space in your valuable paper to insert a few lines in reference to the proposed FencourtGordon road. The construction of this road will mean considerable expeuje, inasmuch as 25 chains of land must be taken under the Public Works Act, and there are nearly 25 chains of gully with a grade of about 1 in 10. A work involving such an expenditure of public money should not be undertaken without a grave necessity, which, I maintain, docs not exist. 1 have to protest against it both as a ratepayer and on account of the damage that the road will cause in cutting my section to pieces. Blessed is the man who can give a genuine reason fo£ the Cambridge Road Board pushing this roai through. The Chairman, Mr Thomas, told me if I had allowed people to go through my farm there would be uo question of a road. This then must be the raison d' ctre for the'road. Now I publicly challenge any person to say I ever stopped him from crossing my place, though I could have done so on several occasions, and as a bridle patch is what the Board wants, according to Mr Thomas, the condition is already fulfilled. - If the road were wanted to give an outlet to a settler on his farm, to bring goods to a market, factory or town, or to siiorten the distance to a church or school, then there would be valid reason for the undertaking. No such reason exists. It is urged as a specious argument that settlers on Fencourt side would bring their milk to Ihe Karapiro Creamery. They might have done so if Watts' factory had not taken to butter-making. It would be ridiculous to suppose that any man would come over the steepest gully iu the district for the minimum price of butter-fat, while he can get the maximum by going a shorter distance. The Board is no doubt serving the best interests of a few of its wire-pulling friends, who iu turn, wish to strike a blow at their enemies. It,they wished to act without bias and favour why did they refuse the just demand of Mr W. Hicks to have a bridge put across the creek that he might net to his Bection ? The expeuse would be only about £5. He is compelled to his milk from oue bank to the other ou wires, and yet the Board told hioi they had no money ou the same day that they decided on making a road for people yet unborn. It is evident that the undertaking of the road is not the result of argument so much as bias and favour. If it were otherwise, the Chairman, Mr W. H. Thomas, would not have public'y boasted that he pulled down my fence in spite of a protest from Mr C. Buckland. Perhaps it is a privilege of members of the above Board to do such things, which, must be proved in the near future.—l am, etc , R. .1. Doolky. Karapiro, 20th September, 1900.