THE POST OFFICE CLOCK AND TOWER.

Waikato Independent, Volume V, Issue 324, 15 January 1907, Page 5

THE POST OFFICE CLOCK AND TOWER.

(TO THE EDITOR.) Sir, —The correspondents who have dealt with the above subject have generously avoided personalities, which renders it not distasteful to myself, as the mover of the offending (?) resolution to reply to some of the reasons advanced why the Council should not subscribe £IOO towards the proposed post office clock. A public body voting money in 1 this way ought to be able to justify its action, even where, as in the present instance, there are only a few objectors, and that is what I purpose doing as briefly and concisely as possible. The leading argument calling for refutation is not that of motive, but that which says the Borough finances are strained, and that therefore under such circumstances the proposed grant is unwarrantable. I am prepared to admit that next year there will be greater demands on the funds of the Borough than has been the case in time past, and also that the present low rate will require to be increased to meet the new demands on our resources, but I say emphatically that the finances of the borough of Cambridge at the present moment are not strained, and the Borough Treasurer confirms this statement. It is true that the district fund is in debit under £7OO (not sufficient to crush the hopes or daunt the energy of one vigorous person), but surely in a borough that is internally sound and has such bright prospects the expenditure of £IOO out of the borough exchequer on such a valuable and necessary convenience as a town clock cannot reasonably be called either criminal or wasteful. Personally, I took quite an opposite view, believing the vote to be opportune, judicious and progressive, and I feel sure our action will stand the best test of all—the test of time. If some of our people are lacking in idealism, and construe borrowing £IOO into an act of folly and a piece of criminal wrong-doing, then we must agree to differ, for the fundamental difference is one of temperament, and you cannot alter that. Mr O’Toole reminds the Acting-Mayor, and incidentally the taxpayers, that the expenditure of £IOO is equivalent to a threepenny rate. But that is hardly a fair way of representing the case, as it assumes that the £IOO would be paid out of one year’s income, whereas the course that would actually be adopted would be to borrow the amount from our bankers. The loan, let us call it (because our account is not in credit), would bear interest at the usual rate, amounting to £6 per annum, or an infinitesimal tax when distributed .over the whole body of the ratepayers. In the same way that a man who had effected a mortgage on his holding would not deny his family the necessaries of life, but would rather exercise economy and probably be more industrious, I fail to see that the fact of borrowing £IOO at 6 per cent, necessarily means either an •increased rate or spending less money by way of maintenance of roads and footpaths. I really feel (and I know almost the whole community does) that no apology is needed to justify an action of this character. Here was an opportunity that would not present itself again, except perhaps in connection with a Town Hall. In the latter case it would be necessary to borrow £IOOO additional for a clock and tower such as is now proposed for the post office, which would mean £SO per annum in interest and sinking fund until the amount were extinguished (in about 37£ years). Now, I ask any reasonable man if it is not preferable to borrow £IOO now and get the clock at once ? Bather than allow such a favourable opportunity to pass by, and lose the clock, I did what ninety-nine men out of a hundred would have done in similar circumstances, and the result of not sticking at trifles is that in all probability we are going to get the post office clock and tower.

The other side of this question, and consciously or unconsciously it affects everyone, is the aesthetic. We have a ‘number of people here possessed with an ardent desire to make Cambridge more beautiful and still more attractive. Would not a commanding tower and a clock with a peal of sweet toned Westminster bells give an added grace to the building ? The clock itself would be highly useful and the general effect would be to give a permanence and a character to the architecture of the town. Every noble edifice plays its part or exercises an influence over poor mortals like ourselves, and with everything so beautiful in Nature it has always seemed to me an evidence of higher civilisation when people strive to make their surroundings beautiful too. Only two other points remain (Ij the site, and (2) Mr Buckland’s parting wish that we should keep a tight rein on the finances. The Postal Department sent a man here recently to report on the site question, his report has been duly forwarded to his superiors, and according , to a statement in your columns the site has been definitely decided upon. That

'being so, there is nothing to add. Before leaving, the Mayor spoke individually to several Count Alovs in the terms

mentioned. The request was reasonable, but it was not made as to children, and during his absence we have exercised due economy in administering the borough affairs. Mr Buckland did not say to us : If the Government rush you with £BOO, do not spend a hundred to get it. Whatever else he is, Mr Buckland is an opportunist in the sense that he knows when to seize an opportunity, and as one gentleman remarked to me the other day, he would probably have proposed that £l5O be voted. But in this case, we are responsible for our own actions, and are prepared to stand or fall by them. Your report did not mention the voting on the question, but those who voted for the motion were Crs Ferguson, Dickinson, Stone and myself; Cr Davies was absent, but tells me he favours our action entirely. Cr Buckland also looked upon the proposal favourably, and says he would have preferred to vote even more than £IOO, provided it had been paid through the medium of a rate. Cr Hally, although viewing the matter with'favour, thought £SO would be sufficient as a first contribution. Cr O’Toole opposed the whole thing in toto, so that with a single exception the whole Council favours the principle. The progressive party is not shrinking; it is growing. The above explanation constitutes my defence, and so far as I am concerned, the matter will rest there.—l am, etc., E. J. Wilkinson.