NAPIER THEATRE SITE.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 962, 1 November 1910, Page 3

NAPIER THEATRE SITE.

POSITION OF A LOCAL BILL REVIEWED, GOVERNMENT AID SOUGHT. A deputation representing tho Napier Borough Council waHed on the Prime j Minister yesterday and asked the. Government's aid in the passage of the Napier Municipal Theatre Buildings Bill. The Bill proposes to legalise the use of a' portion of a public reserve:as a site for a municipal theatre. Mr. Piawnian (Deputy-Atayor of Napier) said that a poil oi ratepayers had decided to take a portion ot a reserve' in Clivo Square as a site lor a municipal theatre. Tho Bill' providing tor lliis was rejected by the Local bills Committee of tho House probably because Uie Council had not made the matter clear enough. Public feeling was so sirougiy- iu lavour ot the proposal that the whole of the Borough Council and several leading citizens had come to Wellington at their own expense to put tne case before the Prime Minister. Mr. Thomson said it appeared from a letter which Mr. T. E. Taylor had written to Mr. A. L. D. Fraser that there' was an impression that the pretty square in the centre of tho town was to bo taken. This was not so. A reserve of twenty acres h?.d been added at the expense of the council and was being laid out as a. park and playground tor the children, They proposed to use less than half an acre of a rough piece of land for the theatre. ' This was in accordance with the original endowment granted "for the use, benefit, and improvement of the borough of Napier." Mr. A. L. D. Fraser stated that when it was decided to placo the theatre in Give Square, the beauty spot of the city's centre, everyone was against it, but it was not intended to do that noiv, but to take an adjoining piece of land. Mr. J. Vigor Brown had interviewed the leading men of Napier and theatrical agents, all of whom considered Clivo Square tho ideal site. He suggested that the Government could include a clause in its "washing-up" Bill providing what the Borough Council desired. The Prime Minister said he was not able to give an answer without consideration when the position was that the Local Bills Committee had struck out everything in the Bill but the short title. Ho was not at all sure whether notice should not be given to introduce another Bill. He did not know why he should be called upon to settle a point against the decision of a Committee without reference to that Committee. There might have been a misapprehension in the minds of the Committee and they ought possibly to have an opportunity of reviewing their decision. Personally he did not feel inclined to step iD regarding a matter between members of the House and contending parties in the borough of Napier. To insert a clause in the Government's Bill without referring the matter to the Local Bills Committee would be practically defying the Committee. He would not accept that responsibility, though he would give facilities to suspend the Standing Orders so that the Bill could be reintroduced and go back to the Committee. On the question of using reserves for any other purpose than the original, all Governments had objected to alienation, whether Government supporters proposed it or not. Mr. T. E. Taylor remarked that &3 his name, had been mentioned, indicating that he was now of opinion that the, reserve could be diverted from its original purpose, he would like to explain that a wrong construction had been put iipon hi' letter. He wrote that had the tacts beei different, the matter deserved more judical consideration. Since then, having tot more information, he was satisfied the reserve had no right to be tampered with. It belonged to; the people of Napier. There were 11,000 people and onlv 1800' ratepayers, yet the Borough Council simply took a ™ te °f p' lo mt f: payers. The opposition to the Bill would be' more strenuous than ever. , Mr. Nelson: Onlv one in eight of .the citizens refused to sign the petition. Mr. Taylor: I don't think the Bill will get through in any form. Mr. H. G. Ell' (a member of tho Local Bills Committee) remarked' that: it should be said in fairness to Mr. Vigor Brown that the member in charge of the Bill put the facts fully and carefully before the T.ocal Bills Committee. He had never heard of a .deputation going to tho Government asking it to .go deliberately behind a Select Committee of the house, composed of both parties.