1.—9

24

August, passed resolution strongly objecting amalgamation with county, Suburban North Boad District being isolated from rest of county. Local management more economical. Would recommend wholejWanganui Biding being formed one road district, Boad Board having control same. Objections to amalgamation with county administration: Failure to obtain best results for money expended owing lack supervision while works are in progress, large sums being absolutely thrown away in this riding from that cause alone. Local management would tend to lessen expense, and secure better-inspection in this riding, thereby effecting large saving.—W. Gill, Chairman. Takaka Road Board. — Re your telegram of 13th instant, my Board strongly protests against Boad Board being abolished. The Board thinks the present system works less expensively in Collingwood County than if it were merged into the County Council. My Board is also strongly adverse to new district roads being a standard width of 68 ft., as in this district, where the population and traffic are greatest, the roads are only 75 links wide, and are found to be quite wide enough. —W. C. Baigent, Chairman. Takapau Road Board. — Re telegram Counties Bill: Takapau Boad Board considering section 4, subsections (20) to (27) : Unanimous in favour retaining present road districts against amalgamation of Board, except by express wish of ratepayers. Section 15, subsection (c) : Objects to residential qualification. Board is of opinion that present 3ystem local government is satisfactory. Counties Bill now under consideration. Deem unnecessary. —Ambrose Potts, Chairman. Tamahere Road Board. —The Tamahere Boad Board maturedly considered the provisions of Counties Bill when issued, and unanimously agreed that any interference with local government by Boad Boardjwould be prejudicial to public interests. The Kirikiriroa and Cambridge Boad Boards passed resolutions of a similar character, and so did the Huntly and Whangamarino Boad Boards. —A. T. F. Wheeler, Chairman. Tamaki West Road Board. —The Tamaki West Boad Board recommends that present road districts be retained, as they are more economical and efficient than County Councils, and that they be not amalgamated unless at the desire of those interested, and that only ratepayers should have votes. —Alex. Bell, Clerk. Taruheru Road Board. —Haruheru Boad Board objects to being merged in any other Boad Board, but approves of abolition of dual local government, and prefers merging with Cook County. It also protests against proposed extension of local franchise, as past experience proves that under present liberal scale injustice has been done in thinly populated districts.—J. Macfarlane, Chairman. Tataraimaka Road Board. —In reply to your telegram of the 13th August, 1901, the Tataraimaka Boad Board is of the opinion it would be impossible to abolish present, existing Boad Boards, considering, as they do, that the by-roads would be affected to the disadvantage of settlers residing thereon as far as this district is concerned. This Board protests against any alteration in the present system of management.—John Pearce, Chairman. Tauhoa Road Board. —Unable to wire before. Besolution of Board re Counties Bill: That this Board strongly objects to either merge into county or amalgamate, but wish to be retained in its present position. —F. Boler, Clerk. Te Horo Road Board. —This Board considers that the question of retaining Boad Boards should be decided by vote of the ratepayers, and where the County Councils have county roads running through road districts the ratepayers should also have the power to place such roads under the district Boad Board.—Alfred Monk, Chairman. Temuka Road Board. —Temuka Boad Board strongly desire retention their district as at present. Consider ratepayers satisfied with present system of County Council and Boad Board, but if it be a question of one only, and which, would much prefer Boad Board retained. Bateable value of district, £753,000 ; rates collected last year, £2,310. Proposed to give extended powers to retained road districts approved of.—John Talbot, Chairman. Te Puke Road Board. —This Board would beg to recommend franchise remain as at present; also, either Boad Boards or County Councils, but not both, to be at option of ratepayers' wish. —Samuel Branzord, Chairman. Tepuna Road Board. —Consider dual control objectionable. Boad Boards, except in very exceptional cases, be abolished. Committee to take their place. These might be elected instead of appointed. Strongly object to extension franchise. Satisfied present arrangements. Agree with suggestions made County Council conference.—J. A. M. Davidson, Chairman. Titirangi Road Board. —This Board wishes to retain its individuality, bu!' has no objection to being merged into county. We are opposed to any further extension of franchise.—Tucker, Chairman. Tomahawk Road Board. —Bill appears satisfactory. Do not object thereto, provided no curtailment of powers of existing Boad Boards, or any alteration in constitution thereof which would alter or prejudicially affect this district. Section 319 should be extended to include Parts XXV., XXVIII., XXXIV., XXXV., and XXXVI. Section 235, subsection (7), should be extended to include any nuisance committed. Section 78, Sixth Schedule, Government subsidy: Peninsula County consists entirely of road districts. No county roads. Counties Act suspended. Provision must be made that Boards receive full subsidy under new Act. —Alex. Swaill, Chairman. Tomahaivk Road Board. — Re Counties Bill: I have the honour to acknowledge receipt of and thank you for your telegram of the 13th inst., to which I replied yesterday as follows [see preceding paragraph]. Neither the local Postmaster nor Officer in Charge had instructions to frank reply, which I therefore sent " collect." The feeling of my Board is against any curtailment of our powers or alteration of our district. There are many exceedingly valuable provisions in the new Bill, and I shall be glad if my suggestions can be embodied therein, and the powers of Boad Boards thereby extended. Section 78, Government subsidy : You will see the force of my remarks hereon when you take into consideration the position of this county. We have no County Council, the Act