The Wanganui Herald. [PUBLISHED DAILY.] TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 1908.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XXXXII, Issue 12429, 31 March 1908, Page 4

The Wanganui Herald. [PUBLISHED DAILY.] TUESDAY, MARCH 31, 1908.

THE UPOKONQARO FERRY.

Because the Upokongaro Ferry cannot be carried on at a considerable profit, the Wanganui County Councillors, in their wisdom, have decided that it must bo closed. This decision is no doubt in accordance with the principles which have guided that body for so many years in regard to doing as little as possible to advance the interests of settlers and settlement and throwing cold water on any propressive movement. Those principles, however, are not in accord with the views of country settlers and the public generally, and it is not surprising that there should be a strong outburst of feeling against "this latest and most extraordinary step taken by the Council. As well might the Council urge that because the Wanganui Bridge is not a payable concern, therefore it should be closed, and by the same peculiar reasoning the Council may deem it necessary to put a stop to traffic on the roads. The fact is, the ferry is a great convenience — indeed, it is a necessity — for some of the Makirikiri and inland settlers, and in their interests alone, even, if no others benefited by it, it should be carried on. One of the grounds of the Wanganui County Council's conrpjaintj, rr we understand, is that the iVaitotaira Council does not take a share of the responsibility, but such an objection, Burely, could only have been raised by those who are .unacquainted with the history of the ferry. It is now nearly 25 years since the Waitotara County severed from the Wanganui County, and one of the conditions of settlement, when the division of the assets and liabilities was made, was that the Wanganui County should continue to ' control the Upokongaro Ferry. The Waitotara representatives eouguu to have it made over ta their Council, but the Wanganui representatives as strenuously, and, as it turned out, more successfully, fought for their Council maintaining undivided its interest in it. The late Mr Jt. E. Fitzgerald was Controller and Auditor-General at the time, and he came specially to Wanganui to apportion, the assets ands liabilities, the result of which apportionment was that the ferry was left in the hands of the parent body. The reason, the Wanganui County Council had no desire to relinquish it and that the Waitotara body sought to secure it was that it was a good payable concern, and considered a sound investment, bringing in a clear annual revenue .of between £40 and £50. The profit for nearly 25 yejirs has gone into the exchequer of the Wanganui County, and, so far as we are aware, no suggestion has ever been made that the Waitotara Council "should have a share of it. . Now, however, that there is a possibility of the ferry being carried on at a loss, the Wanganui County Councillors have decided to close it unless the Waitotara County shares the responsibility. What about the revenue derived from the ferry during the past 25 years? There surely must be a substantial sum to the credit of the ferry account, and until that is exhausted the Wanganui County Council should hesitate to ask for a re-adjustment. As a matter

of fact, however, the ferry is not likely to be carried on at a, loss. If we are rightly informed, the Wanganui County Council, or the chairman of that body, recently received an offer to work the ferry, the tenderer intimating his willingness to give a premium of ,£lO or =£13 per annum. In the circumstances, therefore, the Wanganui County Council's action in closing the ferry is inexplicable, and most certainly unjustifiable. Even if there were absolutely no financial return, the County should hesitate before acting as it has done in such a drastic fashion. When the ferry account shows a deficit, and the Waitotara Council has been appealed to and refuses to assist, then there may be cause for complaint on. the part of the Wanganui County .Council, but to close the ferry on such a pretext as has been advanced is to our mind quite unjustifiable, and certainly not calculated to raise the mana of the Councillors in the estimation of those who have appointed them to carry out their behests and control and manage the affaire of the district.