I THE PUBLISHED DAILY. THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 1871.

Grey River Argus, Volume XI, Issue 948, 10 August 1871, Page 2

I THE PUBLISHED DAILY. THURSDA Y, AUGUST 10, 1871.

That much vexed question, the ownership of the rights to the various ferries over the Grey River, was recently definitely settled,, and as every resident and traveller in the district is more or less interested in the question, we may as well state the grounds upon which the award of the umpire was made. After, years of quarrelling over the rights to these ferries, to' 1 jthe serious injury of the public, the Governments of Nelson and Westland appointed arbitrators to enquire into the rights of the respective claimants, and after a long and careful investigation, they referred the matter for final decision lo Mrij. E. FitzGerald,. as .umpire. The points settled by the arbitrators, and submitted to the umpire for decision, were three in number : — lst. The right each of the under-mentioned persons had to occupy or 'possess the ferry set after his name. J. M. Langdon, to the ferry over the Arnold River, near the junction of the same with the .River Grey. G. Curtis, to the same ferry as claimed by J. M, Langdon. A. Alabaster, to a ferry over the Grey River at the Coal Pits. A. Montgomery, to a ferry over the Grey River at Rocky Island. Upon this point, Mr FitzGerald decided as follows :— That within the meaning of the laws which authorise the establishment of exclusive or protected rights to ferries over rivers, none of the persons above-mentioned have any rights to any of these ferries at all. The umpire evidently means, that as neither of the claimants to these ferries held protection from the Governments on" both sides of the river, they had no legal rights at all. The secoßd point submitted by the arbitrators was as follows : — 2. What legal rights and privileges are to be secured by each Government, conjointly, to the persons adjudged to be rightfully entitled to possession of any ferry? To this the answer was " none," because no person had any legal right to them. The third point was : —3. What course of action it is expedient for the respective Governments to take with reference to these ferries upon the expiration of the protection given to the person entitled to occupation? To this the umpire made the following recommendations : — lt is expedient that the two Governments should unite in the selection of some one person well acquainted with the necessities of the traffic over the river in question, and should move the Governor to delegate to him the necessary legal powers over both banks of the river, for the establishment of protected ferries. In the meantime, it is not expedient that any obstruction should be ojSered to those who are working these ferries without legal protection ; and it a question for the consideration of tlw two Governments whether the traffic over these two rivers may not now \>q left open to public competition. We have thus given an outline of the arbitration and its results. The decision arrived at by the umpire is a simple and straightforward one, and will do merely to clear away possible future misunderstandings on this subject. If would, be well that his recommendation was. approved of, and acted upon by the Nelson arid Westland Governments, as to the appointment of a person who was intimately acquainted with the necessities of the district, with power to say what ferries on the Grey River should be protected, and that the Governor should be moved to delegate small local powers to him. As it is at present, there is no legally-pro-tected ferry on the Grey Eiyer, and it is high time that the proposition ttaown out by the umpire, —to the effect that the time may have arrived when all the ferries should be thrown open to public competition — should be fairly and impartially considered.