The Globe. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1877.

Globe, Volume VIII, Issue 1011, 21 September 1877, Page 2

The Globe. FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 21, 1877.

As important Bill has just been introduccd in the Upper House by the Hon. John Hall, entitled the Canterbury Public; Domains Amendment Bill. Its object is to enlarge the powers of Domain Boards jn this provincial district by enabling than to make a charge for admission to their grounds on special occasions. The clauses to which we refer read as follows :

lb shall be lawful for any Public Domain Board in the Provincial District of Canterbury constituted under the authority aforesaid, upon the occasion of any exhibition, .special cricket-raatch, meeting for athletic sports, ov other occasion of the like kind, to make such charge for the admission of all persons to the suid domains, gardens, or recreation grounds, or any part thereof, as such Board shall seem fit : Provided always ►hat the numher of days in any one year upon which such charge shall bo made shall not uxceed fourteen. The resolution of any Domain Board by which any such charge shall be authprissod shall to notified i« %% Jeaet qm nowapascr

circulating in the town or district in which such domain is situated.

Any Domain Board may, by such resolution as aforesaid, authorise the payment of the proceeds of any such charge for admission to the promoters of such exhibition, cricket-match, meeting for athletic sports, or other occasion, as to the Board shall seem lit. In the remarks which we are about to make we shall look upon the Bill only as it affects Christchurch. In this connection its object is, no doubt, chielly to enable a charge to be made at the gate of the Christchurch cricket ground on the occasion of an interprovincial, inter-colonial, or All-Eng-land match. AYere it so amended as to permit a charge of say one shilling to be made for admission to the cricket ground at such special times, no possible objection could be raised to it. On the contrary, we think it quite right that the Cricket Association should have the power of making the general public who visit the ground on the occasion of a great match contribute something towards the expense. But we must decidedly object to the general powers sought to be obtained. As the Domain Board is at present constituted there would be no great danger of the rights of the public being trampled upon. But the day might come when different views would prevail. If the Bill, in its present shape, were to .become law, it would be in the power of the Board to exclude the general public on certain days from any part of Hagley Park or the Domain. On the occasion of a public holiday we might find the Gardens shut against us except on the payment of an entrance fee, because the Board had granted their use for the day to the Archery Club. We strongly protest against any such power being given, more especially to an irresponsible body. Were the Bill passed, in its present shape it would be but the thin end of the wedge, which might be followed by further restrictions being sought and obtained. Thanks to the wisdom of the founders of Christchurch, we have got a noble Park and Domain, which, as the city grows in size, will be more and more appreciated. Let us jealously preserve their free and unrestricted use by resisting this attempted encroachment. We hope steps will be at once taken to have the Bill so amended as to apply only to the cricket ground.

Oue readers are already familiar, from the telegrams published in our columns from Timaru, with the particulars of the recent altercations between the Bench and Bar there. The subject has come before Parliament. The Wellington correspondent of the Timaru Herald telegraphed on the 18th instant as follows :—" Mr. WakeHeld this afternoon asked the Minister of Justice whether he proposed to take any steps with regard to the altercations between the Bench and Bar in the Eesident Magistrate's Court at Timaru. To the astonishment of everybody, Mr. Eees, member for Auckland City East, rose and stated that he had received a petition from 800 electors of Timaru and Wairnate, asking him to bring the matter before the House. Mr. Bowen evaded Mr. Wakefield's question altogether, and in answer to Mr. Rees said he would make further inquiry. Mr. White, Crown prosecutor at Timaru, is supposed to be at the bottom of Mr. Eees's petition, but the member for Geraldine has publicly stated that he believes Mr. White incapable of such an underhand piece of work. Mr, Stafford and Mr. Teschemaker are furious at the treachery of their constituents. The matter is likely to be brought before the House in a prominent way." The Herald is very indignant at the slight cast upon the members for Timaru and Waimate, and characterises the conduct of the petitioners as an unmistakeable and unwarranted expression of want of confidence in them.