LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

(The following letter, from the May 1892 issue of the Thornbury Magazine, concerns cyclists and road maintenance and is typical of a number published around that time)

Sir - I see in your last (March) issue an account of a meeting of Cyclists held at the Cossham Hall, on Feb. 18th.

Through pressure of work, occasioned by the death of the late Road Surveyor, I was unable to attend that meeting but with your permission, should like to reply to certain remarks, contained in the report of the above meeting.

I was not surprised to find that there were complaints made as to the state of the roads in general - that is, both Main and District - but those gentlemen should bear in mind the bad season we have just experienced, it has been one of the worst known for 20 years, not by heavy falls of snow, or by an excessive wet season, but by the continuation of the frosts, giving out quickly and returning again, this sort of weather necessitates a great deal of stone being relaid, where the roads have heaved, and our roads being coated with lime stone, are more perceptible to the frost, than roads covered with a harder material, say Clee Hill stone, as used beyond Patchway.

I see the majority of the meeting appeared to be in favour of having the "Steam Roller". One of the meeting said "he thought the expense of a Steam Roller would not be greater than the expense of Manual labour, some of which would be dispensed with". It is certain he did not make enquiries before he had made that statement, or knows but little as to the maintenance of roads. From my knowledge, and from an interview with the Main Road Surveyor at Gloucester, it is considerably more, adding £53 per mile per annum, beyond the average cost. Our Thornbury roads average about £17 per mile, per annum, add to this £53 per mile, for any parts our Highway Board so treat and we have £70 per mile. But as the Cyclists are so anxious to get the Steam Roller, by all means let them have it, but let them pay for it themselves, as they monopolize the roads so much.

A great deal is talked of just now about doing away with the "Contract System", as letting certain lengths of road by contract. I quite agree with Mr. J. C. James in his circular on the subject, but if the roads are repaired by day labour, the Highway Board will find that the Surveyor's estimate-if worked out scientifically-will be, I should not be surprised, 20 or even 25 per cent beyond what has been spent for the year now ended. In some instances where the roads that were taken off the Thornbury District and taken to by the County Council I have been told have cost double, there is more Manual labour, for a man can work every day in the week if he can find something to do, but whether the roads are better I must leave for the Cyclists to say. With the talk of Steam Rollers, and the agitation of some County Councillors, that no road man shall be employed under 2/6d (12.5p) per day, perhaps we may yet have roads as carriage drives.

One of the resolutions passed, read "The employment of less material and more skilled labour," does that mean a more skilled Surveyor, or more skilled labourers? If the latter what can you expect in the way of "skill" for 2/- (10p) per day? If it means the former let us hope our Highway Board won't do the same as a Highway Board did, not a thousand miles from Gloucester. They had a Surveyor at £140 per annum; they were greatly dis-satisfied with him and said they would get a "good man" and pay him £300 to devote his whole time to the roads. The same Surveyor applied for the post, and strange to say was re-elected at £300.

Apologizing for the time and space I have taken up,

I am,

Yours obediently,

ROADS.

Thornbury,

March 31st 1892.