THE HARBOR BOARD ELECTION AND THE BOILING DOWN COMPANY.

Patea Mail, Volume IV, Issue 395, 29 January 1879, Page 2

THE HARBOR BOARD ELECTION AND THE BOILING DOWN COMPANY.

(To Ike Editor of the Patea Mail.)

Sir, —In the coming contest for the election for the Harbor Board members, tiie test question is to be—“ Will you vote for the wharf at the Heads ; if not, you don’t go in.” Now, Sir, in the real interests of the public. I am of opinion that it would be well for the facts of the case to be stated. There is a piece of land at the Heads which was sot aside four years ago for a Pilot Station. This land was to lie used by the Pilot in lieu of a portion of his salary. A number of gentlemen constituted themselves a Boiling Down Company, and applied to the Waste Lands Board for a lease of a portion of the Pilot station. What the result of the application was no one except the-Company appears to know. Certainly the Land Board had no power to grant a lease, nor do I think the Company have to this day got it. About twelve months ago the Company applied to the Harbor Board for leave to erect a wharf “ on land erased BY them” at the Patca Heads. No particulars were given as to the nature, position, or extent of the wharf; and the Board declined to consider the matter until these particulars were supplied. This has never as yet been done, but repeated applications have been made, unaccompanied by any particulars except that the wharf was to go to low-water mark. The Board, however, carefully enquired into the matter, and passed a resolution that they had no power to grant the permission. The Boiling Down Company then applied to - the Government for permission, and were informed that the power could be given by ax Ordek-IX-C’OUXCIL, but that the Crown Law Officer had advised that *• the whole circumstances •should be carefully enquired into. LEST ANY RIGHTS SHOULD BE INADVERTENTLY CREATED.” Notwithstanding this, some members of the Board endeavoured to pass a resolution to grant permission to erect this wharf, a thing which they have clearly no right to do. I would strongly recommend the present members of the Board, the candidates for election, and the public, to read clauses and sub-sections of •* ’Hie Harbors Act, 1878,” Nos. 153 to 157, and there they will find the powers of the Board defined. So far I have dealt with the question_ of the power of the Board to grant the permission in your next issue I will give good reasons why the power should be withheld, even if it was in the hands of the Board to grant it. Meantime, I will ask the public to suspend its judgment. This matter is of far more importance than appears upon the face of it,—l am. kc., G. F. SHERWOOD.