THE GREY STREET TREES.

Waikato Times, Volume 105, Issue 17787, 12 August 1929, Page 9

THE GREY STREET TREES.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—The opinion expressed by certain members of the Borough Council that the fine old English trees which make Grey Street the most beautiful thoroughfare in Hamilton should be ruthlessly cut down is enough to make local residents gnash their teeth and weep. These magnificent, grand old trees, casting a grateful shade along one of the main arterial routes into the town, are an asset that it would take another 60 years to replace. They have incited more interest amongst visitors than all the accomplishments — past, present, or the future—of many of our councillors are ever likely to arouse, and their removal would be an act of wantonness. I went last Christmas on a motor tour through the North Island, seeing many spots made by Nature or the hand of man, visions of enchanting loveliness, but passing through Grey Street on my return in the twilight of a summer’s day, with those noble trees forming an avenue of refreshing green and in places their branches meeting overhead in a leafy canopy, I averred that I had seen nothing better in any part that I had been. It was then that I realised what a wonderful asset Hamilton possessed in that beautiful avenue of trees, which, standing as they do almost as a gateway to the town, must give visitors a first Impression that will not be readily dismissed. Such statements as those credited to the chairman of the Works Committee, that the trees “spelt stagnation for Hamilton East and that they were keeping that part of the town back,” are difficult of comprehension, for as a local resident I was always of the opinion that they were a feature that made Hamilton East, or at least Grey Street, a more pleasant place to live in. Ills further statement that they should be rooted out and planted elsewhere must have been intended as a joke, for the transplanting of a sixty-year-old giant would present some difficulty- I freely admit that there are one or two old macrocarpa trees that could be cut down without spoiling the appearance of the street, but to remove the others would be tantamount to vandalism. No, my City Fathers, incline your weighty deliberations towards matters of a constructive rather than a destructive nature and consider how you can make Hamilton a more beautiful place, instead of thinking of removing one of its main adornments. Beauty such as enshrined in Grey Street cannot be replaced in your life or mine.-—I am, etc., HANDS OFF GREY STREET. Hamilton East, August 8.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —It was with profound disgust that I read the report published in your-issue of the Bth instant of the meeting of the Hamilton Borough Council at which was discussed the question of removing the trees in Grey Street, Hamilton East. I have every respect for and admire those who without hope of reward come forward and gratuitously give their services for the welfare of the town, and not being imbued with the same public spirit I hesitate ever to criticise their actions. However, I feel bound to come forward and publicly condemn those members of the oouncil who apparently seek to perpetrate what is nothing short of an outrage. Your report does not make dear what is the opinion of the majority of the councillors on the question, but it serves to show that at least two of them are sufficiently endowed with that degree of common sense which will impel them to actively oppose a step which, in the absence of proof to the contrary, would amount to a wanton act of vandalism. If there is good reiason for removing those wonderful old trees, I shall be glad to learn it, but the arguments in favour of suoh a course which were put forward by Crs. Tyler, Lafferty and Barton carry just about as much weight as the arguments put forward at a council meeting recently in favour of retaining Hayes’ paddock for building sites (probably in 1999) rather than rendering it available for games which might be indulged in at \Veek-ends (Sunday perhaps included). Hamilton East residents should feel grateful to Crs. Bourne and Denz for the sensible opposition raised by them and it behoves all true citizens to solidly back up the efforts of those two councillors. If trees in the street are bad for Hamilton East, or, as Gr. Tyler puts it, “spell ruination,” then it no doubt follows that trees in streets arc inherently bad, so why not let them all be rooted out wherever they may be found? I believe that Cr. Tyler bolds this view—that he has a rooted objection to trees growing in streets. Gr. Lafferty ably seconds him, for reasons best known to himself. Perhaps he wants some of our beautiful trees shifted to Frankton. Cr. Barton has, so he says, been gradually pulling them (the trees) out. One can imagine that

the process would be “gradual,” for those sixty-years-old oaks woe id require some pulling, and I do not think Cr. Barton should expend any more of his surplus energy in that direction until he has ascertained that his actions meet with the approbation of the citizens most concerned.—l am, etc., EASTENDER. Hamilton, August 10.