Guyra to Inverell Railway
Saturday 18 June 1892, The Sydney Morning Herald
GUYRA TO INVERELL RAILWAY. Yesterday morning Mr. James Inglis, M.L.A., introduced to the Minister for Works a representa- tive deputation of residents from the districts of Armidale, Hillgrove, Guyra, Tingha, Wandsworth, Inverell, and Bundarra. Mr. Inglis and others present urged the necessity for the Minister to authorise a re-survey of a rail- way route from Guyra to Inverell. A numerously signed petition was presented to the Minister in favour of this project. Mr. LYNE, after listening to arguments, said the proposed railway had been a vexed question, and one not at all pleasant for him to deal with, particularly because it had been strongly advocated by his col- league the Minister for Lands, who, in evidence given before the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Works, had given it his support. In his belief Mr. Copeland was mistaken concerning one or two minor matters. Personally the route of the line did not concern him, and he had no interest to serve except that of the public. He had been over the route from Glen Innes to Inverell, and though it would be a difficult line to construct it would pass through country none of which was bad. He had not been over the proposed Guyra route, but officers of his department reported that the land was of in- ferior quality. In his opinion railway communication between Guyra and Inverell would not be effected for many years to come. The most likely point of communication would be Tenterfield. The Glen Innes to Inverell proposal had been rejected by the Public Works Committee by one vote. He did not regard that fact, however, in the light of any de- cision as to the best route. Personally he favoured the Glen Innes route, but he saw that he had been taken to task by the public press, which said he referred the proposal to the committee in only a half-hearted way. He regretted that the Public Works Act did not empower him to submit more than one proposal for the same work to the Parlia- mentary Committee, as probably alternative pro- posals for any given works would prevent deadlocks. He thought confining the Minister to the submission of one proposal was a flaw in the Act, which should be amended. Probably deputations from other districts would approach him on the subject, and he would say at once he did not believe he could take action. The granting a re-survey might be construed into a change of opinion on his part regarding the route, but in his mind no change had taken place. He was in a rather unpleasant, position, for he did not like to deny anything in reason his colleague Mr. Copeland asked him to do. He could not see his way clear to take any further action, but he in- tended to visit Glen Innes in the near future, and when in that district he would inspect the route brought under his notice by the deputation.
Leave a Reply