THE COAL DEPOT V. THE SALT-WATER BATHS.

Daily Southern Cross, Volume XXIV, Issue 3318, 5 March 1868, Page 3

THE COAL DEPOT Y. THE SALT-WATER BATHS.

To the Editor of the Daily Sqvtuixn Cxosf. Sih,— lf any man, by energy and perseverance, succeeds in developing the natural resources of a colony, that man certainly merits the gratitude and support of his fellow-colonists. Any man who, by his superior knowledge and forethought can find profitable employment for hundreds of his fellowmen ought to meet with every encouragement ; nothing that might tend to cramp his extended views should be thrown in his way, Mr. John McLeod, M.P.C., has done all this. From his first sojourn amongst us he has done all in his power to point out, and practically bring before tbe public, the vast natural resources of this colony,— first ia the timber, and latterly in the coal trade. Having succeeded in bringing a plentiful supply of the last-mentioned most necessary article to our doors, he must be stopped, crushed out of the market, because, forsooth, a few gentlemen have chosen to erect a private bathing establishment alongside of a public wharf ! . Mr. McLeod has had the temerity to land a few tons of coals on this said wharf — hence the great outcry by the bathers. Now, this wharf or breakwater has been erected at a very great expense (some £16,000 or £18,000), and paid for out of the oublic purse. Are the public to be debarred from all further use or occupation of this breakwater P The shareholders of the Salt-water Bach Company have got a twenty-one years' lease of about one-fourth of this public wharf ; yet they are .'not content, but wish to monopolise the whole. Will the rent which these bath shareholders pay for , the space they occupy do anything like pay the interest; on the money laid out for the building of this wharf ? — Doubtful. These baths cannot with propriety be called public baths, although erected on public ground. The shareholders and . their friends who use these baths seem to be a peculiar class, and would like, to "keep themsslves by themselves, fiy all means let them do so. They have already effectually excluded the working daises by charging sixpence for a single bath. But, after all, if clean water and privacy were required for the baths, the site has been' badly chosen. At present the bathers have all the benefits to he demft} from the continual flow of mud, dirt, and filth from the great Queen-skeet common sewer, - which', is so beautifully silting up the harbour inside the breakwater, the deleterious dribbliogs from the Gas Works, and, to complete the mixture, coal du«t is to be added. So much for the' present A. fet£ y**i* hence, and these baths will be smothered/ They will be in a short time .surrounded b* wharves, Ts, and jetties. The railway terminus will be in their vicinity. (When U . The. shareholders mast lay their account to meet with all these surroundings and very likely other* at /bad, or perhaps;4rorse, than the coal depftb. Much, better meet theie difficulties with a good'gwe* keep quiet, and content themselves with the good rich slice of public property which they (the shareholders) have appropriated to their own exclusive me and benefit. Let them do this, and say nothing about the coals.— l am,*o, ' Phoßokuic [Our correspondent is somewhat in error. The Salt-water Bath Company asked for a lease for a term of fifty years, at the annual rent of £5. The bill passed through committee with a twenty-one rears' lease clause; but on Tuesday-, it was recommitted, aud a lease for seren years granted. Tuis period, we think, given ample time to repay the shareholders for their outlay ;. but were it not, it would be preposterous to expect^ the public property to be locked up for twenty-one years to .ensure the success of a joint itook i»p*|ulatio«i— fift iD.s.o.] >:.>h- -"''rtfr