FATE in the BALANCE

Sun (Auckland), Volume 1, Issue 28, 26 April 1927, Page 1

FATE in the BALANCE

Takapuna Tramways May Languish in Long Idleness CHALLENGE TO FERRY DEAL ? The fate of tramtracks and rolling stock which are so familiar to travellers by the Takapuna ferries hangs in the balance. Excluded from the purchase recently effected by the Devonport Ferry Company, they may linger in idleness if the transaction proves to be valid. If not, and if the present mayor and his ticket are returned at to-morrow’s poll, they may enjoy electrification and a new lease of life.

The Issues raised by the sale of the property and interests of the Takapuna Tramways and Ferry Company have complicated the North Shore traffic tannic, and have furnished further ammunition for the opposing factions contesting the Takapuna mayor -alty and Borough Council seats tomorrow.

The retiring mayor. Mr. J. D. Tvlorison asserts that the property acquired last week by the Devonport Ferry Company is covered by an option held by the Borough Council, and that the sale is therefore invalid, while the Devonport Ferry Company retorts that its legal advisers pronounce that the option, such as it is, is not binding. It Mr. Morison's opponents are returned to-morrow the problem is simplified, because the new council would not then exercise the option. Otherwise the validity of the Devonport Company’s purchase will be contested, but in the meantime the company is going ahead with the extension of its ferry and motor services to Bayswater. From the overlapping issues involved in the dispute stands out the question ot the Takapuna steam tramway, described as “the orphan of the storm.” What will happen to the trams and tracks if the Devonport Company’s purchase is validated? The buyers specifically excluded the trams from their purchase, and the system must apparently remain idle. MR A. M. GOULD’S OPINION Into this question comes the deed of delegation between the Takapuna Company and the Takapuna Borough Council. According to Mr. A. M. Gould, a former Mayor of Takapuna, and a candidate for the council tomorrow, the Takapuna Tramway Company can sell the idle property, or else the Takapuna Borough Council can, after the lapse of stipulated periods, dispose of it if the company or its liquidators fail to do so. Mr. Gould pointed out that the effect of the Takapuna Tramway Company’s sale to the Devonport Ferry Company was a repudiation of the former’s obligations under the deed of delegation which stipulated that the trams should be kept running. As a penalty for this breach, he considered the Borough Council was entitled to sell up the tram service after due notice had been given.

Asked if the Takapuna Tramway Company could be compelled to remove its tracks and restore the streets, Mr. Gould said he thought not. “The company’s covenant,” he said, “is to maintain the system. Apparently the deed of delegation contemplated that the tramways were to be a permanent institution, and as far as I know there is no condition obliging the company to remove the rails if the plant is lying idle.” Mr. Gould added, in answer to further questions, the opinion that, the options held by the Takapuna Borough Council were not binding. He explained

that he had not seen the memoranda, but he had been led to believe that capable lawyers had pronounced them invalid. POSITION OF EMPLOYEES Another phase introduced by the cessation of the tramways service is the position of the employees, who are thus put out of work. The statement of the Mayor of Takapuna, to the effect that he instituted relief works for the benefit of these men, is challenged by Mr. J. Williamson, the opposition candidate for the mayoralty, who claims that it was he who drew the attention of mayor to the plight of the tramwaymen, and made provisional arrangements to keep them in work. OPTION BATTLE CONFLICTING LEGAL OPINIONS The uncertainty concerning the validity of the options.held by the Takapuna Borough Council over the Takapuna Tramways and Ferry Company’s property is not cleared by conflicting legal opinions. This morning a SUN representative was shown a copy of a letter written by Mr. E. Blampild, solicitor for the debenture holders in the company, to one of his clients. Mr. Blampild expressed the belief that the options were entirely binding, and pointed out that the recent negotiations with the Devonport Ferry Company were conducted on that assumption, with the proviso that, should the options be exercised, the Devonport Ferry Company be paid £15,000, over and above the returned purchase money, as compensation for the annulment of the sale. "FATAL OBJECTIONS” A view contrary to Mr. Blampild’s is taken by Mr. E. H. Northcroft, senior counsel to the Devonport company, who stated this morning that he had advised his clients that there were three fatal objections to the options as arranged by Mr. Morison, mayor of Takapuna. First, the letters were so loosely and vaguely worded as to be difficult of enforcement, and the other points were that conditions that could not be fulfilled were involved. Notably, said Mr. Northcroft, the borough’s limited power to establish a ferry service did not authorise it to deal with trams as well.

Mr. Northcroft said the contracts now asserted by Mr. Morison to be sound were not essentially different from those held by Mr.. Justice MacGregor to be beyond the powers of the council. Moreover, the letters showed the purchase price to be £65,000, not £40,500, as Mr. Morison had stated.