HARBOR BOARD.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1292, 7 March 1883, Page 2

HARBOR BOARD.

■ft- ( At the usual meeting of the Board | las! evening there were present, Messrs E. K. Brown (Chairman), Townlej, I Chrisp, Lewis, Tutchen, and Whinray. i The minutes were read and confirmed, j and the outgoing correspondence read. I A letter from the Marine department was read, stating that the question of the foreshore was under consideration ; and also notifying that Mr D. Johnstone had been appointed Auditor. Mr Mark Davis, the ferryman, wrote pointing out that the drivers of stock crossed the Taruheru bridge with stock which were crossed at the head of the Waimata Mr Davis also pointed out

that the bridge was within half a mile of the ferry, and asked to be allowed to collect ferry charges at the bridge. After some discussion, Mr Lewis moved that the lessee of the ferry be informed that the Board had no power to interfere as the bridge was open when the contract was made.

Cr. Townley seconded this, and it was carried.

The following letter was was read from Messrs Common, Shelton & Co , relative to the trouble which exists between the Arm and the two local bodies ■- —

Gisborne, Feb. 17, 1883. The Sect. Gisborne Harbor Board, Gisborne. Sir, —We wrote you On the 14th November re the agreement between the Bordugh Council and ourselves, and have received no reply from you to our letter, We understand this agreement has been handed to you for completion. As it is now more than four months since the Bill was passed which enabled the Harbor Board to complete the arrangement entered into, we are desirous of getting the matter completed. In order to facilitate matters we may inform you, without prejudice to our present action or any action we may afterwards be advised to take that we wrote the Government some time since on this matter, as follows :—“ At the same time we would mention we are not desirous of compelling the Council to carry out the agreement to the letter if they find it inconvenient to do so, but will meet them in any compromise which may be suggested, as long as we secure equal value to ourselves as originally agreed on.” We »re perfectly willing to meet you and discuss the matter with you if you are desirous of making any alterations in the original agreement. Awaiting your reply, Yours, faithfully, Common, Shelton, ft Co.

Mr Whinray said he was of opinion they could do nothing in the matter as the foreshore had not been vested in the Board.

Mr Townley was of opinion that the letter should be laid on the table, and that the discussion proceed. They had nothing elso to do, and it was early. He thought it an excellent opportunity. Mr Chrisp said he considered that they were at a dead lock. He thought the Government would do nothing in the way of handing over the foreshore until the Board had come to some setlernent with Common, Shelton & Co. He thought this from the tone of the letter received from the Government. Mr Common, who was present, said the letter possibly should have been sent to the Borough Council, and yet, perhapi, considering the Harbor Board would have control of the foreshore, it was as well to address it to the latter. Mr Common detailed the circumstances, but these have been so often before our readers that it is not necessary to reproduce them. He thought that although the reclaiming of land along Read’s Quay must by the Act compel the Board to make the road 100 feet wide, that if application were made to the Government to reduce it to 66 feet it would very likely be granted, and without dictating to the Board he would respectfully submit that such an application should bo made. All that he desired was that a fair and equitable settlement should be come to.

Mr Chrisp said that he had learned from good authority that the road would have to be 100 feet wide.

I Mr Townley said that in addition to i the road having to be 100 feet wide, | neither Harbor Board nor Borough I Council had the power to lease any portion of it. -There was another | thing, and that was Messrs Common, i Shelton A Co. had not complied with | the requirements of the aafreement between that firm and the Borough Council. No plans of the proposed improvements were received by the Cnuncil so that they might have been forwarded to the Government for approval. Then again there was the I deed of session by the late Captain j Read to the Government iu 1870, granting the foreshore. He was of i opinion the Board was the body to deal with the question, and not the Borough Council. There was evidently some agency at work in Wellington with power sufficient to prevent the Government handing over the foreshore to the Board. ' Mr Tutchen said they could do nothing in the matter, neither of the bodies could lease the laud. He thought, however, it was only right to give them compensation for the building, but could not give them a lease. Mr Tucker said he had always been against the agreement, and was still. Still he thought that Common, Shelton and Co. were entitled to some compensation for what they had expended. He was of opinion that a valuation should be made, and that the compensation should be taken out by occupation. Mr Tucker detailed his plan which was simply this : say the valuation was £5OO, Messrs Common, Shelton and Co.’s actual rental would be £5O for ten years. The Board would neither receive rent, nor would Common and Co. have to pay any. Each year’s rental would be de- I ducted from the amount of the valua- i tion. Thue, if at the expiration of 5 ! years the amount to be paid to Common and Co. would have been reduced to £250. He was anxious that some arrangement should be made which would be fair to both parties; so that the burgesses would lose nothing, and and Common and Co. have gained nothing, or suffered any loss.

After some further discussion, Mr Whinray moved that the Board go into Committee, which was agreed to. After a short adjournment, the Committee and Mr Common resumed the discussion, and the suggestion of Mr Tucker was carried out. It being resolved to make a proposition to that effect to Messrs Common, .Shelton and Co.