The Globe. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1874.

Globe, Volume II, Issue 152, 28 November 1874, Page 2

The Globe. SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 28, 1874.

On Monday last a most important question was raised in the City Council, when the taking over of a street of a less width than is named in the Municipal Corporations Act, 18G7, from a private individual, came on for discussion. As this matter is of the utmost consequence to the public in a sanitary point of view, and may be the means of endless litigation, and a waste of the ratepayers money if not settled at once, we will point out to our readers what appears to us to be the state of the law with reference thereto. It appears that on Monday last, Councillor Bishop referred the Council to the question of taking over a street which Mr Kenwood desired to hand over to the Council. The width was said to be thirty-three feet. Councillor Bapbael, it seems, drew the attention of the Council to the Municipal Corporations Act of ISG7, and said that in view of this Act the Council had no power to do so. His Worship the Mayor, it would appear, coincided with Councillor Eaphael. As it is quite possible that there are a number of streets and alleys, and we can haidly doubt it from personal observation, of a less width than is prescribed by the Act, we will quote the clauses which bear upon this point, as, if there have been mistakes made, the sooner they are remedied the better. Clause 291 of the Municipal Corporations Actof 1867 enacts that "No street " being a carriage way unless 40ft in " width (such width to be ascertained " by measuring at right angles to the " course of such street) from front to " front of the buildings or proposed " sites for buildings on either side " thereof, shall after the constitution " of any borough hereunder be found " within such borough." Clause 292—" No alley or court of " less than 20ft in width (such width " to be determined as prescribed by " the last preceding section) shall after " the constitution of any borough " hereunder be formed within such " borough and for the purposes of this " Act a court or alley shall uean any " street not being a carriage way " whether a thoroughfare or not." Clause 293.—" Every alley to be " hereafter formed shall have tiro " entrances each of the full width of " the alley and oue open from the " ground upwards." Now, we must leave our readers to judge whether in their perigrinations they have not come across streets and alleys contravening they above clauses. But now comes the most important clause of all, because it is likely to touch the pockets of the ratepayers and owners of property, if the streets taken over by the Council are not in accordance with the above sections.

" Clause 295.—" Every person who " shall form or lay out in any borough "or permit or suffer to be formed " within any borough or laid out any " new street, court, or alley, contrary " to the provisions of this Act, unless " the same shall have been formally " sanctioned by the Council, which " sanction they are hereby empowered " to give, shall forfeit and pay a sum " not exceeding £SO, and a further " sum of not exceeding £o per day for " every day after the first during " which he shall suffer or permit such " new street, court, or alley, to remain " so formed or laid out."

Such is the law relating to taking over streets, &c, within the borough ; it remains to be seen whether it has been fully complied with. We hear that a motion is likely to be brought before the Council at an early date, to test the fact whether it has or not. The motion is an important one, and it behoves the public to give every information on the subject, because much of the sickness in Christchurch can be traced to tho over-crowded state of these very courts and alleys,

some of which have no thoroughfare at all. The motion will act as a caution to the owners and persons who may have laid out sucli streets, it will also act as a caution to the Council if they have taken over any streets, &c, under the prescribed width, as it will prevent them sinning again, and it will save the ratepayers' money, and the owners of property from serious litigation and expense. ♦ It is a wonder that in a town like Lyttelton, where house accommodation is so scarce, that something is not done by the Government to afford at least a roof for those who arc by misfortune deprived of their homes. Some of the sufferers by the late fire, although they have no lack of friends who would assist them with money, have nowhere to lay their heads. Surely some building might be erected, at a small cost, in which those who are temporarily deprived of lodgment might find shelter. A place is provided for the reception of the dead, why not for the living. There are no lack of humane people who would willingly subscribe to wards any good end, but they cannot give house room. It is to be hoped that, before another fire occurs, some steps may be taken in this matter.