GAS CO. V. THE COUNCIL.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 589, 18 August 1909, Page 6

GAS CO. V. THE COUNCIL.

MR. WILLIAM FERGUSON IN REPLY. Following on the correspondence published a day or two ago, comee a reply to the City Council from Mr. William Ferguson, managing director of the Wellington Gas Company, to the letter forwarded him on August 10. The reply, after, dealing with various mutters in connection with, previous letters, runs as under:— "With regard: to that portion of your letter asking how the company w.ould have proceeded had Clause 9 of the C4as Supply Act not been existent, and suggesting that the cqmpany would have approached the corporation for its consent, I think that your committee, in asking such a question, has not attached sufficient importance-to'the'fact that;the .company bus been advised, both by its own solicitors and by counsel, that' the corporation had no statutory power to grant such a.consent, and that the Legislature had provided the . necessary method under Clause 9 of the Gas Supply Act. Any applications that, have been made to the council in tlie- past have been uiider statutory powers, or under agreements basad on statutory powers.' ' "My letter of the 4th instant was not intended, to be an application for : permission'to traverse portion. of the MelroV district, but was intended as a request.that your commit-tee-should;-if. it thought fit; show to the company how, and in what manner, the council can legally grant the desired permission. It appears to be dear that there is not any direct, power'in the Municipal' Corporations' Act to, grant the required easement, and that it can only be .obtained by , some expedient or method which • may or may not be a valid one at law. That you should explain in writing the manner in which you deem that, the .council could grant the right seems to be a request that could reasonably be complied with, without, loss of dignity- , by the council or its committee, and. I regret exceedingly that this courtesy has not been extended to the company. ..-,-. "I, am unable to agree that an admission .that the city owns the streets 'logically carries with it the right to the council to burden them with easements. The corporation cannot'have any powers outside those conferred upon it by statute, ■ and the company has asked in vain that it should be indicated' how your committee proposes to.legally grant the proposed easement; in fact, the company is advised that. your, council is trying to a'rro-. gate to itself powers which Parliament has not bestowed upon it.

"It is a matter of opinion as to how far, if at all, the rights of connecting the proposed works at Miramar with tho Works in Wellington will benefit the company. Tho views that you express in your letter—that they will enable, the company, to "indefinitely extend tho. enterprise, treble the business, reduce .the expenses,'and thereby effect.an ap-. preciation .of, its .share capital'—are so extreme and. so far removed from. the facts. that, lia'vo been submitted,.to. your , committee by myself nt the .various ■ conference!;, that it . appears, .hopeless to negotiate f iifther. 'If . such' be an expression . of : the real attitude of the cpni--mittee,-and not "merely drawn, up for publication only, it will become' necessary-for•• tho board to seriously consider whether its policy of trying to' expand the ■ business of the. company with the growth of the suburbs hus.not been ah erroneous one. If ..the citizens—(is shown by tho action of their representatives in the City.Councils-do not desire gas facilities in . the outlying i districts,. then the company may have to consider. whether it should.cease its capital expenditure therein. Such a course of action would-involve, the removal, of the large gasholder from-Miramar to a situ within the Town Belt at, a considerable loss, which loss must necessarily be • indirectly borne by the-consumers of gns; and,:although.such a step .may probably be in ..the interests of the shareholders of the company, it-would, I submit, ,be regrettable from a public point of view, as stopping the , of largo sums of money, , and placing.the residents' wi the suburbs at a great .disadvantage as compared with those resident within the -Town Belt. , ." '. •■ '..-

"It appears that the committee desires that the company shall make i a formal' application for certain.rights which the company.is not satisfied that the council has tEe power to legally grant. In order, that it may not be .said that the company nas not done everything it can reasonably do to meet the wishes of the Gas. Committee of the council, ■ I.now, without prejudice to any rights, powers, or privileges which, the company ha,?,, .or,, claims to possess, formally apply to the council— . "Ist. For permission to lay and use mains to .connect the company's works, in . Wei- • Hiigton with the boroughs of Karori,. Onslow, and Miramar, or with other suburuun . districts.... , , ... "2nd. For an- agreement embodying the' ' terms arrived at, in respect to tho.Melrose ■ district, as set out under headings 1 to' 6 inclusive in my letter of July U (acknowledged by. you in your letter of the 17th idem, as accurately expressing the position arrived, at); . ~.■•' ._

"At , the conference held on July 22i the Mayor stated that, if the . city granted "permission to- connect the works at Miramar, the committee-would choose alternative (a) in my letter of July 21. If this, be so, it would then be embodied in Clause 6 of mv letter-of July 14.- ''..'.. ■;.. ■

"Having '/made tin's application to comply with the request of. the committee, I trust that your 'committee .will now be able to disclose the method by which, and the terms under which, it proposes to afford the facilities sought for by the company." ' MENTIONED IN COURT. The dispute between the City 'Council and the Gas 'Company was mentioned in Chambers yesterday morning, before hisHonour, Mr; Justice Cooper. Mr. Skerrett K.C., appeared for. the City, Council in support of tho summons.for interrogatories,,, and Mr., Dean represented", the: Gas Company. Objection' was raised by'Mr: Dean to interrogatories bearing on the :history of Clause 9.0f the , Gas Supply Act,- 1908, on. the negotiations ■between the Gas' Company and' *he Miramar Borough, and-.on tieioost of the land and -works at Miramar.." The Court upheld the objection/ and' disallowed these interrogatories. Mr. Dean : also objected .to another' of. the. interrogatories;filed, by the City Council, reading as foUows:—"ls it not intended by: the company ■ within a f ew years to cease, either wholly, or, partly, the manufacture of. gas in' its works in. the oity of .Wellington, and' to. supply-the. city of Wellington with "gas, either wholly or partly,: from the ■ company's, works at Mirainar?" His Honour ctvid that Mr. Dean could' ; supp'y any answer he.thought' fit,.but the interrogatory would bo allowed. '■ If. this/point not relevant, it would not be discussed.