The Globe. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1877.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1001, 10 September 1877, Page 2

The Globe. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 10, 1877.

The Christchurch City Eeserves Bill is modest in dimensions, and on the face of it a perfectly harmless measure, hut read in the light of the Municipal Corporations Act of last session, it is more far-reaching than at first sight appears. It proposes first of all to vest, for recreation purposes, in the Mayor, Councillors, and citizens of Christchurch, Cranmer square, Latimer square, the west side of Cathedral square, and the strip of land fronting the Domain, from the Hospital to the College bridge. It would have been wiser, we think, to have vested the latter strip of land in the Domain Board. It fronts the Domain, and its style of planting should he in keeping with the grounds inside. If it passes into the hands of the Council we have no guarantee that at some future time a works committee may take it into its head to reverse what its predecessors have done. We have a sample of the want of continuity of design in the treatment of the belts. We think, however, that Cranmer, Latimer, and West Cathedral squares should certainly be vested in the city, for the purpose, as the Bill states, of being used as recreation grounds for the inhabitants. Clause I vests the Market place in the city in trust for the purposes of a market place. Clause 3 provides that the parcels of laud described in schedule 2 shall be vested in the Mayor, &c., in trust for the Municipal purposes of the city. Elsewhere we publish this schedule. A clause in the Municipal Corporations Act, empowers the Council, subject to certain conditions, to let byway of lease such lands for a term of not more than thirty-six years A glance at the schedule to the Bill shows that there are no less than thirty-three such sections, which the Council may thus let should the bill become law. We ask, is it wise to give such power without mj restrictions

whatever? We, of course, thoroughly agree with the proposal that those plots of land should he vested in the city. It is very necessary that some local authority should have control not only over the streets, but over the squares and other plots of land hitherto in the hands of the Grovernment. But there is danger in handing them over unconditionally. The Bill before us provides that the squares are to be kept as recreation grounds for ever, but it is left to the good sense of the Council what shall be done with the various sections mentioned in schedule 2. At present no great harm may result. The pressure upon our finances is not so great, nor are those scraps of land so valuable, as to induce the Council to part with them. But the time may come when all this will be altered. As the city grows their value will rapidly increase, and some future Council may be induced to let the majority of them by auction. Should this ever be the case, not only will the health of the city be injured, but any little beauty it possesses destroyed. If the map of the city is examined it will be seen that a great many of these plots lie on the banks of the river. If properly planted [and laid out, not only would they add to the beauty of the town, but they would serve as lungs to it. Ao great objection could be raised, we suppose, to using say the present site of the Magistrate’s Court, or any other of the larger sections mentioned in the schedule as a site of a Town Hall and Municipal Offices. The one at present used as the Court House is centrally situated, is away from the noise and bustle of business, and is yet convenient to all parts of the city. But, with this exception, we think it would be the greatest possible mistake to place it in the power of the City Council to let those reserves. It is quite right of course that we should seek to secure them to the city, but a clause should be introduced into the Bill limiting the use to which they could be applied. Without the Avon, Christchurch would be one of the ugliest cities in the colony. It should be the aim, therefore, of her citizens to display, to the greatest advantage, this one source of attraction; and, instead of seeking to hide its beauties, rather to take every opportunity of displaying them. This will not be done by crowding probably ugly buildings on every available open space on its banks. We do not, of course, say that such is the intention of the framers of the Bill. Ear from it. They may have resolved, as soon as they are put in possession, to lay out and plant those sections, but, as we cannot bind our successors by simple resolutions, it would be better, when legislating on the matter, to put it out of the power of any future Council of being guilty of such a blunder.

The meeting of Wednesday next will afford the citizens an opportunity of becoming acquainted with the opinions of the candidates now before them. We trust that the experiences of the past, as regards municipal meetings, will not he repeated on this occasion. The ratepayers should endeavour, by carefully weighing the views put forth by the respective speakers, to form a basis upon which to record their votes. This is the real object of the meeting, and \i e hope there will he nothing in coniiict with it. As regards the election itself, it may be noticed that the question of non-residence has been raised by a correspondent in one of the morning papers. It needs but a slight reference to the past history of municipal affairs to show that the argument here used cannot he sustained. Mr. C. W. Turner, who is a non-resident, was returned at the last election, occupying a high position on the poll. His services to the city during his term of office prove conclusively that non-residence is no disqualification. The argument used by the writer affects, amongst others, Messrs Pratt and Ruddenklau. Though not resident in the city, the interest possessed by these gentlemen is a guarantee that, if returned, they will serve the ratepayers faithfully. Let the citizens go to the poll on Thursday and select the men they think best fitted to represent them, from business ability, whether resident in the city or not, and if they give their votes on these grounds they cannot do wrong.