Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

DAY'S BAY BUSH

VESTED IN THE CITY

AGREEMENT WITH THE GOVERNMENT

Some refcrenco to the purchase of tho Day's Bay bush was inado at the meeting of' the City Council last night. It arose upon thp following clauso in the report of tho Finance Committee: —

"That the council waive their claim to tho Government's contribution of £3000 towards tho purchase of the Day's Bay bush, in view of the proposal of tho •Government to have tho bush lands vested in them, and that the council apply for the issue of the neccs-

sary certificate of title."

The Mayor, moving the clause, detailed what had happened anterior to tho purchase of tho Day's Bay bush, mentioning incidentally that the Government had subscribed £3000. Howover, ho said, when the City Council went to collect the Government subsidy thoy found that the Government vote was for the purchase of the land lor scenery preservation. This would mean that the land would be vested in the Government, and that in tho event of a fire occurring, which would destroy tho place as & resort, tho council expenditure would lie lost absolutely. This the council could not consider, and the Government offered then to vest the bush in tho city if the £3000 subsidy were foregone. Another reason why the city should keep the land was _ that it contained tho basin from which tho water supply for the settlement there would have to ba drawn. _ Councillor G. Frost supported the motion. He said that tho dual control would be intolerable, and unsatisfactory in any case. The last reason for retention of the land mentioned by the Mayor—that concerning water supply —was a very strong one.

Councillor Lon M'Kenzie said that ho believed the Bay would yet he a much-improved beauty snot by reason of the planting already done there by the council of such trees as acacias and ratas. Ho had not been enamoured of the purchase when it was made but he thought the council should make the best of it. He agreed with a suggestion (previously made by Councillor W. J. Thompson) that th'a matter ought to be considered in committee.

This course, was at, length decided upon. In committee the council aoireed to the clear recommendation, and this was later approved in open council.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19160825.2.34

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2859, 25 August 1916, Page 6

Word count
Tapeke kupu
381

DAY'S BAY BUSH Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2859, 25 August 1916, Page 6

DAY'S BAY BUSH Dominion, Volume 9, Issue 2859, 25 August 1916, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert