The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1913.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXXIV, Issue 3745, 3 February 1913, Page 4

The Gisborne Times. PUBLISHED EVERY MORNING. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 1913.

It will have been noted that Mr Lysnar is still very muck opposed to the proposal to erect the bridge over the Waimata River at Ormond Road instead of at McLean Street. He is of course right when he states that the McLean

Is ths County to Get OR “Scot Free”?

Street site was approved by the Com- j mission which was appointed by the j Government to 'consider the matter. But it must not be overlooked that ; when the Commission sat evidence was J brought forward not only on behalf of the Borough Council, but also by the Cook County, as it had been sug gested; and quite properly, too, that it should be required to bear a proportion of the cost of the structure, and also of its maintenance. It was no doubt the case, then, that as it was held by witnesses for the County that the bridge should not be erected lower down than McLean Street, and as the ex-Mayor and some other residents also testified in favor of that site, the Commission felt it could not do otherwise than select McLean Street as the site of the bridge. Now ; our object- in touching on the matter is not to re-cliseuss at length whether the present Council did right in deciding later to have the bridge built j at Ormond Road instead of at Me- j Lean Street. Mr Lysnar has made 1 out a strong case in favor-of McLean j Street as the site; but we believe a J much stronger case could be made out . in favor of the site which has since been agreed upon. For one thing, the erection of the bridge at Ormond Road will obviate the necessity of erecting a special sewerage bridge in that locality. Then, again, when it comes about that the Kaiti bridge is no longer safe for traffic the projected bridge at Ormond Road will be found much more convenient than one at McLean Street during the lengthy period whilst a new structure is being thrown, across the Turanganui River. As to the stock traffic it may prove necessary in a much shorter space of time than is generally imagined to make special proviso!n in this regard, perhaps by the erection 1 of a stock bridge higher up than even McLean Street. But we are digressing. What we intended especially to ; emphasise on this occasion was that i Mr Lysnar Iras, however, done well | to raise the question as to how the | Co-ok County now stands from the i jx>int of view of liability in eonneet- | ion with the bridge that it lias now been decided to erect at Ormond Road j instead of at McLean Street. If the i bridge had been erected at McLean | Street- the County would have had to I pay one-sixth or, say, £IOOO, of the I cost. Mr Lysnar holds that the alj teration of the site frees the County 1 of all liability and it would seem that ; some, if not- the whole, of the mem- | bars of the County Council are of j exactly the same view. Before the j County can be called upon to c-on-j tribute towards the cost of a bridge ! at Ormond Road a- Commission, it is | contended, must -again sit—and the I evidence must be taken before the ! work is begun—and it must again be decided that some liability would attach to the County as well as to the borough. What the ratepayers are entitled to know then, is (1) if it is a fact, as we are credibly informed, that the County have never been consulted as to the proposed change of site, and (2) whether Mr Lysnar isright when he says that if things go on as they are going the County will be relieved of all liability in the matter. It is surely high time that the I present Mayor made a statement on ] the subject.