HOROTIU BRIDGE

Waikato Times, Volume 90, Issue 14023, 28 March 1919, Page 5

HOROTIU BRIDGE

DEPUTATION TO COUNTY COUNCIL.

SETTLERS PREPARED. TO HELP THEMSELVES.

A deputation of &. dozen settlers from Horotiu waited upon the Waikato 1 County • Council .yesterday in connectionwith the proposed bridge at Horot'ii. * Mr Duxfield, acting as spokesman, • said a mcetng of ratepayers was heldrecently, and it was unanimously agreed that it would be a mistake to “hang up’’ the bridge. There was no guarantee that the .price of maoennls would decrease. The .amount of money involved (£2000) was not sufficient to hold up the bridge, because the increased mileage would be such a serous matter to the settlers. He inderstobd both counties had agreed to spend about £(5000, and it was the (extra £2OOO which seemed to be hanging'the matter up. On account of this, <-('1710 of the ratepayers, about 100 in all, on the Waikato Comity side of the bridge, and in close proximity thereto, were prepared to declare a special rating area, and raise the extra £2OOO, without calling on the other ratepayers. A member of the deputation pointed out that once the money was diverted, as suggested, it would be very difficult to obtain it again. The clerk read a letter received fr6m Messrs Thomson and Tarrer, forwarding the recommendation of the engineer that the construction o'f the bridge be postponed until next spring, as the rainy season would considerably interfere with the foundations. The present high cost of material end shortage of labour was likely to be loss acute later on. 'The chairman said the settlers’ offer. nut a different complexion on the mat. ter, and the Council would put no obstruction in their way. £SOOO had “been borrowed by the Council for the purpose, but tenders were considerably higher than anticipated. It was largely a matter of finance.

Cr. Thomas congratulated the set-

tlers on their offer. The Council ‘had had no intention -o’f hanging up the matter indefinitely, and, in view of the offer, he thought they should call fresh fenders.

Or. "Newell pointed out that, owing to the shortage of laliaur, no con. tractor would neree to any specified time for comnletion. He thought 'it would be advisable to follow the advice of f.he engineer. Other Councillors agreed, and the Council decided to take steps to declare the special rating area, and call for Fresh tenders for the work. It would ,il=n do all it could to expedite the cur»"Bj of a Government subsidy, Tf a -PI for P\ subsidy was granted, it would not be necessity to Mke advantage of the offer. *lt imritfl be weil : ito sprinsi l>cfore anything could he don-/ Xh« f^nnt"' :; 'ip the Counc'i '■iir.ir sympathetic bearing, and withdrew.

THE PROHIBITION PJDLL.

-Reconstruction needs two things—population and capital. Obviously both will gravitate where taxation is Aowesi. That being so, can New Zealand afford to carry on, and yearly increase, an avoidable burden of taxation? Obviously 110! It is admitted that 55 per cens of the expenditure on gaols, judiciary, hospitals, police, etc., is directly due to liquor. Thus Prohibition u<ould immediately save £810,935. The £5.000,000 now spent in liquor will be expended jn other waj.s, and it is safe to assume will yield the same percentage to revenue as does the rest of production. This will amount to £780,000. Increased efficiency will undoubtedly represent a further £780,000 (it would probably be double that), making a grand 'total of £2,370,935. Place against this the £1,000,000 loss from liquor revenue, plus £250,000 sinking fund, and interest on the compensation money, and prohibition gives us a net Kain of over £1,000.000 per annum. It's :up to us all .right, and the day is Thursday, April 10. Strike out the top line. 827