CITY LEASES.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1699, 15 March 1913, Page 11

CITY LEASES.

' MAYOR'S VIEWS CRITICISED. In a statement reported, in The Dominion yesterday the Mayor (Mr. D. M'Laren) elaborated his previous contention that if , the corporation varied the conditions of its endowment leases the' interests of owners of freeholds might be prejudiced.. - This view of the matter was further criticised yesterday by Mr. Gerald Fitzgerald when he was interviewed by a Dominion reporter. "How could a freeholder reasonably grumble," Mr. Fitzgerald asked, "if an advantage which he now enjoyed:as a Tesnlt of someone else's muddling was taken away from him? A freeholder, he went on to remark, could always look forward to ultimately recouping himself for his outlay. If the market turned, against him for a time he would 6imply deoline t<> part with, his property for the time .being, and, always supposing that his financial position was

strong enough to enable him to hang on to his investment, he would 1 ultimately secure a remunerative return upon it. The inorement thus secured by the freeholder was not in any case obtained by the leaseholder. "As to what the Mayor says about two forms of lease," ! said Mr. Fitzgerald,: "we have never discussed. the .second kind .of lease. Our 1 contentionsVhave. been vMj:, direoted against the forra of lease whlcn is renewable every fourteen years .(after an" initial period of 21 years) without compensation tor improvements direct or indirect. This is'the only lease that pre--6ents any rear difficulties. "I don't quite understand the Mayor's last point about objecting to a uniform plan of valuation," said Mr. Fitzgerald. I should put the matter in this way: If adequate inquiry, by the aid ol ! the Court of Appeal, has succeeded in determining the most fair and equitable basis for the computation of a fair Tent, it is difficult to ynderstahd how any valuation oan bo made on any other basis with advantage to either party or to the principles of equity." Reverting sto the comparative value of leasehold and freehold, Mr. Fitzgerald remarked that the city did not sell to the leaseholder: what the freeholder was get-, ting. The value of. a leasehold and the value of a freehold were essentially different things, and thero was no fair-basis of comparison between them. The only fair method by which to determine the fair rent of a leasehold was to adopt the method laid down by the Court of Appeal, namely, to assess the value of the leasehold irrespective of any building 1 which it might carry. ■ • In- the statement published yesterday as being , made by the Mayor relating to city leases two errors oocurred. Mr. J. E. Fitzgerald's name appeared instead of that of Mr. Gerald Fitzgerald, and _ Mr. Fletoher's name also appeared. Neither Councillor Fitzgerald nor Councillor Fletcher has yet made a pronouncment : on the leasehold anestion.