CHURCH LEASES: LANDLORD AND TENANT.

Evening Star, Issue 7361, 5 November 1887, Page 2 (Supplement)

CHURCH LEASES: LANDLORD AND TENANT.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—l was pleased to read the letters of "A Presbyterian" and "Knox" in your issues recently respecting the reduction of rents of church leases. " Knox " is not quite correct in his assertion that " all other public bodies have had to materially reduce the rents of their tenants." For instance, our City Corporation refused lately to reduce the rents of their tenants. What can " Knox " expept after such a worthy (?) example 1 Certainly,' the Corporation and the Pr. sby terian Church should have been the first to consider their tenants' interests, and not the last to bleed the tenants and require their full pound of flesh. If either of these bodies bsve not the legal power to reduce the rents of their tenant?, then the sooner they acquire that power the better for all concerned, and for the welfare of the City. Parliament .is now in session. Let these bodies apply for the statutory powers if they require them. It appears to me an anomalous state of affaire. We have, nearly side by side, tenants under different public bodies—one tenant, under the Harbor Board, carrying on business successfully with a reduced rental, and another tenant, under the Corporation or the church, unable to compete with his neighbor because of his high rental, When he applies to his landlord for a reduction of his rent, to be put on an even footing with his neighbors, his application for reduction is refused without rhyme or reason.—l am, etc., John Henry Bunce. Dunedin, November 3.