Other formats

    TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

The New Zealand Railways Magazine, Volume 5, Issue 2 (June 2, 1930)

Tramway Proposal Defeated

Tramway Proposal Defeated.

In October, 1855, a petition was presented to the Provincial Council by certain inhabitants of Canterbury praying that the Superintendent devote the sums then at his disposal for work on the Sumner road, to the laying down of a wooden tramway between Christchurch and the Shag Rock (Sumner), and that a Bill be introduced for the raising of a loan, by the sale of public debentures, the loan to be devoted to the completion of the Sumner road. Counter petitions were presented by the inhabitants of Lyttelton and Akaroa protesting against any such diversion of the funds available. A resolution was moved in the Council proposing the construction of the wooden tramway, but the motion was not carried. By a vote of 15 to 3 the Council declared in favour of the metalled cart road.

About this time the province had some disagreement with the General Government regarding the division of the land revenue on which page 51 the province mainly depended for its improvement works. Owing to the cessation of revenue the works were held up. The Council took the unusual course of referring to this dispute in the address presented to the Governor (Colonel Thomas Gore Browne) to welcome him on his visit to the province. Subsequently the Provincial Government was given control of the Lands Department in the province, subject to the payment of a fixed sum per annum for the purposes of the General Government.

Meantime there was grave public dissatisfaction at the delay in completing the Sumner road. Some excellent work had been done, but the tunnel under Evans Pass, which was the principal feature of the scheme, had not been commenced. There was a strong body of opinion in favour of employing steam lighters to convey goods between ships at Lyttelton and the various coastal ports. The wreck, on her first trip, of the steamer “Alma,” on the Sumner bar, somewhat discouraged this opinion, but the main opposition came from those having interests in Lyttelton, who saw the possibility of the diversion of trade from the port.