THE MISSING EXPEDITION. CONDEMNED, BUT NOT DEMOLISHED.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1060, 24 February 1911, Page 5

THE MISSING EXPEDITION.

CONDEMNED, BUT NOT DEMOLISHED.

SUGGESTED USE OF WIRELESS ..I TELEGRAPHY. 3 By 'JeleerHDh-'Prcis ,<"s^ (Bee, February 21,••1.15 a.fl?.) ■"-*3 ■ Sydney,. lebrnavy.23. Father Shaw, of' the Rnmlwick wireless •- J station, suggests that wireless telegraphy should bo used in the search for the nuss-. .fevj ing Papuan party. He proposes to Jend.\?3 the • Government several ; sets of .jMtru-*?.vj ijiepts Some would bo placed ers at different point®-,, and, others could bo taken by the March partjes. Commijnication could thus be kept between ■■.thowVrS different parties i £

IkvSTRONG COMMENT AT CITY p;^&i'': : •;■ 'Council-• »•■"■. :-v'. AGAINST. .'."' fpUli^'-r■'■''''———- :■■.'•".! : ' ,;: •""■■ Sofflo, 'strong comment was.indulgod in |by;nj?mbere of ,<ho' City, Council last I"in.: discussing tho following ref(ebmmcridation oftho.Fublio 'Health', Com:|niittee'~--':';' : '■:■•, ':■ ■ ■>'_.-• - : > ! : '*: " : ' |.;lii';That steps be takon for the imme-¥£.-.dia^6 f ;i'dcmo)ition of a building in bjjliinibto'n* Quay .(lata Warnock and ?*:';• Adkin's), as agreed to by tho'parties ; ijl;W. .-.'.' :-:,.';,,..:; ~:. ■:.;. .. Shirtcliffo (chairman of.the explained that tho 'building, tmentjoiied -by tho committee' was condemned; in 1907 by:'.the Health' Dopart|rneht,'.? By an; agreement entered into by representing. tho owners and jtthe corporation, it was agreed that, snb-:tgect,-to.'-.makrne certain alterations, the koVners" should be permitted vto occupy tho $ building for. a ..'further-.' term... ,of three, | years.;.. The-owners undertook to demolish g.thcbu)Wing entirely at ; tho expiration of i that pfh'od. ' Iu 1910 the council notified g. tho owners.that tho building, would have &foy»,'i demolished. , They 'replied by a s.vp'rotejt,*' and declined • to carry out tho §terms*pf tho agreement. .'■ Tho case was ttakeniTrv Ithe. council to 'the Magistrate's Courtf 'but jndgmenCwais given jigainst K.ik.; .It: seemed to the' committee extral>'.?™ in 1 »'y that; a legal agreement, such'as fchad .been: entered into by tho lb<?al: repre*6entatiTes of the parties, should ■be void ij.and brjrio, effects < } Apart .from tho, moral the: agreement. wns;a.legal one;' there should bo 6omb means:of hav--3?P«lt-'-enforced.. However, tho Court had KTulod^lhat'it>.had-no' jurisdiction in tho k'raatter.; ■?The committee, had considered be .done,; and had passed **he. • resolution, submitted.', There,-- were |;two courses open. One was to bring an paction" in tho Supreme Court' and try to rehforce' tho.: carrying out of. the agroeHntcnt.'jrThe other coursewas-to comSnieneo; de novo and apply 'to • the -Health ([.Department to have the <' building conpdenined afresh.: U There, was no; doubt, g the speaker thought—the fact was notori£ous—that: this' building: was rightly cons'jOemnfcr three year's ago.,-' It-had been lif {concession on-tho part of the council l>i o '-Kt'' tho onrners au • extension .'of time feta/three, years, in order that they, might" j.ftaya .lime to turn round and consider ( jnow they should" replace- it. ; The ■ aerettobent should, have been carried but. Since a""had; been repudiated, the master should £jnot bo allowed to" drop.,; Thev; should use frevprr'offort :to have' this. building del,.noh?lV;<i: ■! The committeo,had thought :Mt; well; ur order to satisfy themselves as' Hto'thoMesal position, to-'-ask-'-tho" city -Mlieitcr (Mr. J.O'Shen) '.with Councillor feAtkras'on,■■ who had::kindly consented to Saot;in,ithe matter, to consult Mr.'T. F.' (solicitor 'to ; tho.lMiiriicipal. Association) on the matter.'nnd'as to the best ;l:siourse,';■:- to J adopt. .' -Mr. r. Martin, - on ,{j'.bcing.'i consulted, took "up 'tho position .had - been .'.allow-' Jed; to,; drop, .-;and', that it ..would be i;of«t <iif to.' have ■ it,:-, laid -again. j;ln;thu view the City Solicitor concuri-cd.' ■fjlt'-.waH;a most- extraordinary'/procedure jart.-of -tho - owners. of, this prosyperty,'! Councillor iShirtcliffe continued, Rafter, they had : .deliberately undertaken to the .buildings at, tho end of thrco .rjcars'-to. absolutely repudiate the agreejk ln'enfcr-and force tho'council' to take action gagainst them—in'order •that they .might tget;out of a'clear-obligation.'Concluding, Shirtcliffo'- expressed • ■ a. . hope fethatjf he'council .would immediately take" fifiteps to : havC; its. legal rcqluiremonts chKjforccd;-'."-, ; -'■.-'-•-.;-'. ■- '., i .--^'-- J ... • -.-..'•■ fe-'-CpuliciUor,; Atkinson:' corroborated ; the ' ftiomarlts of ;tho'previpus spcakeK' Ho, , ijsaid'!the'committeo had been very'much Sa'urprised'.and,:disgusted <: at .'■ the .turn had taken. Uo went at length ivinto/tho legal details.of tho case.., The j; lesson, ;_to the council,- ho said, ,was that generous and entered into vJorran(;«ments of this'kind;'it raust'rbe J-w'very;careful, iEverything,,that.the.couniV.cn. hud demanded- in, tlio' first inistanco f'.ihadilicen "carried, out,': b,ut- when at tho ;i»end of three years the timo had come to f[rjnill;. down.. ■ the' building * tho parties said !>•the aijreemont was not binding,- and they to.do.it.;. Tho ,City Sojicitor. was j;npt being'censured' on, this'matter. Ho gihad qpite acecptedthe uijdertakiog given K;him lis.binding. Tho cDuricil should go i> right.' ahead and • lose,: no v'time in enforcYf'iing'Vls legal tights.' In tlio. future.they , ( C»ust.!treat honourable indulgences of this I; kind ;as_ so: much "waste paper. '-" Carmichacl hoped the buildrii'ng properly '/inspected, fciWluqhihad been impossible when the ocpu•j pier ;was in possession.', Ho was given & to iinderstond.;tho*.buildjng>was in. good 'and-that the council-had no pJ.Tight'; to have it pulled down. Ho hoped Sstheyi would get independent advice. '. lij •; Tho rMayqr, Baid an application had • come i,i rom.Messi-s. Brandon,.Hislop and Bran|jdon for 'a permit to mako: an'alteration qin'.th'o building., Mr. Morton, City Enadvised that 1 the'application be v refused.''. This advice was - based. • upon of tho Health Depart-;-:Hi''- j '.. '';-•; ~ 'y<°l : .:*> •• : -'- '"■- : .-. ■ &y" Councillbr Trevor said' ho/ understood ,the northern wall of the building . gwasgood. but that, the southern one was j.; rottfep." The owners' wefo" ready! tb do any Onccesfary- ; worknhe council saw. fit, A)IU ■ f/j.would not ;do to condemn the building hpri;cause. of one wall. :,Ho favoured holding vthe'clause, of the. report over, until they ;;! obtained'more' f,'Councillor Fitzgerald moved -that" the SJ,Tnporf,.be held over for a fortnight; pendjving the receipt of .a report, from Mr. Mor?.'.ton.\\-..■■■■ .:■-''. * '■;.'-.- ■■■■■ . '.- • ■ «v: Councillor : Frost-;fpU sure, the;' buiidliig', Jjwas liot past redemption,"ahd-it would' " "£ bo;a Tcry-hard matter to condemn'it ehyttrely.':'.-■'-' .'•.;.:-.■.'-'. .;■,- •.--.. g ; ;Councillor Luke: said that when the was before the' opunciljn the first fjiqstaiioo. the statement, was made" that the' ftbmlaing was- distinctly ; insanitarv. i>;Thoy 'should, however, get a report' on ?i<tha building from practical." men .with j. tto'engineer. ;',; ,:,;-^1;■.; . ;-5v." Councillor Hindm'arsh 'could' not 'irn'deY:,;Rtand' why the building stood condemned Kby.tbo Health Officer unless there were /:good grounds for it. 1 ''•,:..;. ,/ « .Councillor Cohen said he could point to .-§■ other buildings in-worse condition. .Councillor Shirtcliffo' spoke again in VTSiibport of his first remarks. ..',..,-, ;""•:: The* Mayor, however, suggested' that tho L.clause:relating to ths- matter •be taken Vout qf.the report, aiuMio reforrcd again f>to th» Health Committee. ,In the mean- >■_ time they could refuse the permit to make ;Vtho alterations, and get a report on tho ' - ~' * l ■.".'.' f. -. • . ■.':'' ;At" the deslra of tho majority of the -'-.councillors.. Conncillor Shirtcliffo agreed ',■fo.the withdrawn! of the, clau6o. ; iSv"On": the motion of Councillor Shirtcliffe', Aithe, permit to' effect tho' alterations was $:»fnßed,7', ~.: ;'.. ..-•-■.- ..