Untitled

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 5080, 5 July 1877, Page 2

The disagreement between the City Council and Mr. Travers in respect to conveyances for the town belt leases has been settled, and the result is no doubt satisfactory to the latter. Though the matter is not in itself of much importance, it gives rise to many reflections regarding the legal incubus under which colonists labor. Any ordinary business man acquainted with this particular subject would naturally think that nothing would be easier than to draw up agreements under which the Corporation tenants should enjoy the rights and privileges of the lands leased by them. There were some 60 leases in all, and the conditions of one were almost precisely the same as those of all the others. The City Council therefore instructed their Solicitor to draw up one general agreement, with the laudable desire of saving both the time and money of the tenants. But this course of procedure would not have been conducive to the interests of the City Solicitor or the legal profession generally. To Mr. Thayers’ eyes it would be a bad and dangerous precedent to establish. He protested, and protested with the earnestness of a man to whom some personal injury was about to be done. The Council succumbed, !doubtless half thinking that if the advice of the City Solicitor were not followed, some legal hitch would occur. His Worship the Mayor set his face against the arguments and persuasions of Mr. Travers ; but it was of no avail. We do not find much fault with the legal gentleman for the stand he took in the matter; perhaps he only acted as nine out of ten in his profession would have done ; but we certainly do blame the City Council for .the weakness they displayed. Councillors should have acted firmly, and when the City Solicitor demurred to act in accordance with their wishes, another legal gentlemen should have been employed. We do not suppose that the punctiliousness or etiquette which prevails in the profession would extend its influence so far as to prohibit a re spootable member of the legal fraternityfrom undertaking the work. It should be borne in mind that the City Solicitor though the adviser is also the servant of the Corporation. Certain public work may, have interfered with his private gains, but as long asi that work was fair and within the law, the Council had a perfect right to insist on its execution. What would not be tolerated in any other branch of the Corporation work should not have been allowed to the City Solicitor. But the fact is, the City Councillors as a body are sadly lacking in decisiveness. Time after time they have shown themselves utterly deficient in nerve, and matters have been allowed to drift into confusion owing to the weathercock tendencies of the Council. In proof of this, we need only mention three of the largest questions which have exercised the minds of Councillors recently—the town hall question, the wharf contract, and the drainage scheme. However, in the above-mentioned matters the force of public opinion in a measure urged the Council to a definite course of action. As regards the town belt leases, no such pressure was likely bo be brought to bear. It was a small executive affair, in which the lessees were the parties mainly interested, and it was the duty of the Council to see that they were not put to unnecessary expense. It is not a pleasing reflection for the burgesses of Wellington that their elective body cannot be trusted to deal with simple executive matters of this kind. No doubt a great deal of the timidity Councillors have exhibited lately arises from over-conscientiousness in the discharge of their duties; but uncharitable people will ascribe it to a want of capacity. Whatever may be the cause, ihe weakness of the Council is both derogatory to itself and unsatisfactory to citizen's. However, we are inclined to believe with the writer of the letter signed “ T.L.S.” (which appeared in Monday’s issue), that there is little necessity for leases at all. Those tenants who are doubtful of the good faith of the Corporation can take out their leases if it so please them ; but it is scarcely within the bounds of probability that the City Council will ever make any attempt to curtail the privileges of the tenants on the town belt, and it seems to us that it matters very little whether the conditions of the agreement are in black and white or not. The powers of the lessors and lessees are so clearly defined, outside any provisions they can make themselves, that there can scarcely be any ambiguity as to the conditions under which the leases are held.