THE QUEEN’S WHARF.

New Zealand Times, Volume XXX, Issue 4378, 1 April 1875, Page 2

THE QUEEN’S WHARF.

Sir, —I received a letter, dated 19th March, from Acting Town Clerk, intimating in reply to mine of the 4th Inst., subject “re lease of wharf,” after two meetings of the City Council, “that Mr. Jackson has complied with all the conditions stipulated, and the Council considers the matter at an end.” Now, had this been the truth. I should rot have troubled you any more about this unpleasant and unprofitable business. As my principal considers I have a duty to perform by letting the ratepayers know the real state of affairs, which I shall not shrink from doing; more especially, to be candid, as I feel a little nettled at the treatment I have received at the hands of the City Corporation for the second time. When the wharf and bonded stores, Ac., were sold by auction, more than three years ago, to Mr. Jackson, I was, I think, the next highest bidder. Mr. J. then refused to sign the lease drawn up in accordance with the conditions of sale, for some time, till he got inserted therein covenants never contemplated and at complete variance with the spirit of the auction sale terms, which wore well considered. The advantages given to Mr. Jackson in the altered lease were of such a nature that my partner and myself, had we only known, would have increased our bid some hundreds •of pounds ; but this is not all. My partner, by staying in town for a week at my urgent request (as I declined the responsibility), lost a sale of stock in the Wairarapa, by which he could have cleared a largo amount. Now, I come to the last sale. I should like to know why the lease commences on the Ist February, instead of the advertised time—the oth—and why not signed some weeks earlier than it was, and the month's advance paid at once, instead of three weeks afterwards, simply because Mr. J, made a slight legal quibble. My principal was prepared with the money and to sign lease when ready without any reservation whatever. Now, what will the public say when I tell them that the £075, month's advance, was not paid when duo—lst March—and, I believe, not up to this date. Whoso fault is this? When I lodged my complaint the Council merely passed a motion M That the lease be signed and money paid within twenty-four hours,” and never troubled themselves more about it. I don’t charge any one with favoritism, but the Council with great negligence and indifference, because the Corporation Solicitor and Mr. Jackson's happen, unfortunately, to bo the same gentleman. T trust some of the new brooms will now fulfil their inflated platform promises, and tackle in a manly way a searching inquiry, as they may well not rest assured that it will not mititate much in favor of the selling of the city debentures when it is known that the liberal present of £2OO for the hire of cranes was chucked as it were at Mr. Jackson’s head. (This no one would have grudged had there been a loss of hundreds instead of a gain of thousands on the wharf and bond, Ac.) And the month’s credit, which sum ought to have been paid into the bank in liquidation of the overdraft, ; which is paying ton per cent, interest. I scarcely think the manager, of the New Zealand Bank will be quite so generous, and follow suit by allowing a rebate of interest for the amount short paid. Another £075 is duo on the Ist April, the next Council sitting day. Will my friend, Mr. Clelaml, the- newly-ficdged Councillor, have the pluck to ask at this meeting if it is paid ; if not, what indulgence is to be given ; also, the respective dates, and amounts of payments already made. It will be of the utmost consequence that future tenderers for Corporation contracts, or purchasers by auction, should have the fullest confidence instilled that they will bo fairly treated, and not fish made of one and flesh of another, I delayed writing earlier, as the Mayor and Councillor Dransfleld wore absent.—l am, Ac., James Smith.