WIDENING OF PRINCES STREET.
To the Editor.
Sir, —I heard to-day three facts, which Mr Fish cannot contradict, seriously affecting this vexed question. They put the question in a new light altogether, bceause they clearly show before arbitration was thought of, the property of the church tenants had, even in their own estimation, a very different value to what it has now assumed. Mr Fish offered to take some time ago L 1,500 for what he put in a claim for about L7,C00 for.
Mr Moss offered to take L 2.000 for what he now claims over LIO.OCD for. Messrs Edmond, Forsyth, and M‘Neill would nave gladly taken L 3,000 for the same propeiiy and contingencies which they now claim over L 12,000 for. In justice to the last firm I may state that they never took any active interest in the matter at all, as they would gladly remain even now as they are. All the agitation was got up by others—the above statement of facts may enable your readers to have a pretty shrewd guess by whom. The tenants, even supposing the arbitration is upset, which I sincerely hope it will, will be no worse off than before, so where is the hardship? A Ratepayer. Dunedin, May 20.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18750520.2.13.3
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Evening Star, Issue 3818, 20 May 1875, Page 3
Word count
Tapeke kupu
210WIDENING OF PRINCES STREET. Evening Star, Issue 3818, 20 May 1875, Page 3
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.
Log in