The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas, et Praevalebit. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1886. HAKATERE v. HAMPSTEAD.
In yesterday’s issue we stated that a ratepayer in the lately constituted Town District of Hakatere who wished to ascertain the result of the agitation for a change in the nomenclature of the district, received in reply to a telegram the following message from the Under-Secretary Mr Mayo, Chairman of Town Board, was informed on seventeenth August’that there is no power to alter the name of the Town Disuict.”—lt appeals from this that the Town Board received official intimation almost a month ago that its application to have the name of the district changed had not been granted. Yet no notice of this fact appears in the minutes of the meetings of the Board. Why is this? It is evident cna of two things must have occurred. Either some one has been guilty of great carelessness and negligence, or the Board has quietly “ burked ” the affair. Why it should do this is not very clear, for the matter is one of those that are bound to leak out sooner or later. The reply of the Government to the Board’s request was in a fair way of becoming a secret de lar comedie —|we had an inkling of its purport some days ago—but the telegram we have quoted above finally settles the matter. We take no exception to the Board’s wish to change Hakatere for what in its opinion is a more suitable cognomen ; the ratepayers of the district have a perfect right to name it anything they
please, but on public grounds we dc object to the Board bottling up business which concerns those whom i represents, in this manner. Because ar unfavorable reply has been received, there is nothing for the Board tc be ashamed of; it has done all it could b« reasonably expected to do, We think, however, that in spite of the reply of the Under-Secretary, there is power to change the name of the dis trict. Clause 12 of the Land Act 1885, is as follows : “ The Governor in Council, from time to time, may assign names or designations to, or alter the name or designation of any place, town, town district, village, valley, district, creek, lake, river, harbor, hill or mountain in the colonyfor which there may be no precise or intelligible or fitting name, or when two or more existing names 01 designations are the same or alike, or when any such name or designation is found to be unsuitable.” Now the opponents of the present name of Hakatere claim that there is another district with a similar appellation in this county and they further aver that it is a most unsuitable one. Therefore, if the Board has endeavored to keep the answer it received from (he Government a secret it has been acting in a most unfair way towards this section of the ratepayers, who, were they apprised of the reply might take steps to induce the authorities to refer to the clause we have just quoted, but who now are placed in a somewhat false position in consequence of the action of their representatives. We are reminded, however, that a by-no-means inconsiderable number of ratepayers forwarded a petition to Wellington praying that the designation of Hakatere be not changed. Whether
this has anything to do with the reply j that there is “no power” so to do we are unable to say, not being aware of the contents of the letter the Board received, but, if it has, the opponents of the proposal to change the name to Hampstead will chuckle none the less over their success because they were for a time kept in the dark as to the fate of the movement. From what we know of the gentlemen comprising the Board, in their private capacity, we do not think they would do aught that was not square and above board, but we think that in the case in question the reason why a matter of interest to so many has not been made known should be stated.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG18860911.2.8
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1339, 11 September 1886, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
684The Ashburton Guardian. Magna Est Veritas, et Praevalebit. SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 11, 1886. HAKATERE v. HAMPSTEAD. Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1339, 11 September 1886, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.