ROYAL ARCADE

Evening Star, Issue 20151, 16 April 1929, Page 5

ROYAL ARCADE

HIGHWAY OR PRIVATE PROPERTY ? . i i CASE FOR OWNERS OPENED Further excursions into the earlier history of Dunedin wore made this morning during the hearing of the case in winch the Attorney-General, acting on behalf of tho City Corporation, asked for an injunction restraining the J)unedin Arcade Company from obstructing (he Arcade, which, it was claimed, was a public highway. The company denied (hat there ever was a public highway through the,.. Arcade, and denied that any obstruction caused was wrongful. Mr 11. E. Barrowelough appeared for the plaintiff, and Air W. G. Hay, with him Mr It. L. Fainnaid, for the defendant, “SMITHS NEVER DIE!” Continuing his evidence, Matthew Smith said his ago was 81. Mr Hay: I compliment yon. Witness: Don’t! Smith's never die. Mr Hay: Is that so? Witness: Yes, There arc more coming on. In 1867 or ,13(38, said witness, he Iclfc for Levnka, Fiji, and returned to Dunedin in 1875. The fust row of brick buildings he remembered was in 18(35 on the lower side of the Arcade. The Maclaggan street creek then ran across the properly towards tho old commercial stables and the lean-to’s on the upper side of the. Arcade were built on piles. He described the roadway, and said that at the High street end there was a dance hall, which was often used as a dining room. Mr Hay was proceeding to question witness on the buildings when Mr Bnrrowclongh objected. lie said; “ I think the witness should be asked ” “ The witness is being cpicstioned finite tairly,” remarked His Honour. “You must not interrupt, as the evidence is important.” MARCH PAST AND FREE DRINKS. Witness continued lie painted the gates at the Arcade before any brick buildings were put up. He never saw any hurdles in the Arcade, but a. hoarding was erected during the day while a building was being erected. He iixed Die date of the naming of tho Arcade as Fleet street as 1870, as lamps were then placed in tho centre by John Thompson, who had an interest, in hie Arcade. Drays passed through the street in those days. When the Arcade was opened, he clearly recollected, there was a march past and “ free drinks ” “ When you start [remembering things like that,” said Mr Hay, “ I will not as!;, yon any more questions. Your memory is too good.” FORMER TOWN CLERK'S PECULATIONS. David Love, accountant of Die water department, produced an old -Mger dealing with a period commencing 1875. He said the cash expenditure books tor tiie years 1875 and 1876 were not able to he found. Tbev might have been burned in a fire which destroyed some corporation books some years ago. Witness was proceeding to give details of Die entries to show that in 18(6 Dm cash credited to the extensions account did not exceed £2O in any one month, when His Honour asked vbo was town clerk at, the time. Mr Hay said the town clerk then would ho William Massey. His Honour (to Mr Barrowelough) : “You aro asking tor a certain inference to bo drawn?” Mr Barrowelough : “ Yes.” Witness further said lie did not know of any instance where water had been supplied to private property at the public expense. Mr Hay said the history of Air Alassey was given in Dr Hocken’s book, which showed that in 1881 Air Alassey was censured for irregularities in tho cash balance for 1876. in 1882 there was a libel case of Alassey against Allen, in which heavy damages wore claimed. In. February, 1882, Air Gibson was appointed town clerk, Air Alassev’s services having been dispensed with. Li ISBJ Air and Airs Alnsscy were arrested on a charge of embezzlement of the corporation funds, and were tried at Invercargill. Air Alasscy was lonnd guilty and sentenced to three_ years’ imprisonment, Airs Alassey being acquitted. His Honour said that, because_ the corporation (inanecs were in considerable confusion at that time through tho speculations of Die town clerk, it was important, to recognise that, when books were produced and any explanation offered, it might, he an explanation of a sinister character. WORK ON WATER AfAIN.

William Crawford produced Davis’s diary. Up to 18S-’l all water work was done by contract. Witness joined A. and T. Burt in 1877, and in 1SS1! he joined the corporation water department. On February 7. 187(5, I hero appeared .an entry, “Mechanic find labourers employed in connecting bin main for tho A cade with High street.’’ Mo know all the men employed, with one exception, and they were in A. and T. Burt’s .service '.luring witness’s time. Similar entries continued daily fur ten days, alter which the following appeared: “ Men finished connecting main through Arcade with Maclaggan street.” The main was an ordinary reticulation main. If the work had been done for a private owner, it would have been termed "special supply” by Davidson. The applicants had to pay the full cost of the work. The cost of the job would he Mr Hay: Mow does he know? Mr Barrowclongh ; Yon can ask him that. The cost would bo about £l2 a chain, making the total price £7B, said witness. In later years work on the Arcade main was done 'under his supervision. The original main was put down with an 18 bend, hut in 1912 it was filtered to make a straight connection. No charge was made to any private individual for that work. At other times small repairs wore carried out without being charged to the Arcade Company. To Mr May: One purpose for which Davis kept the diary was to enable him to make chamois against private people when work was done.

Can you say the Arcade was a private job?--From a cheek of his diary, I lake it to he an ordinary job of reticulating the city. If it bad been a special job he would have shown it, in my opinion. Have yon seen any entries of special jobs?—l have not looked through the diary for special jobs.

it comes to this: You cannot say it is a special job?—l have not looked through the diary, but f saw no special jobs marked

Did you mark special jobs in your diary—Yes. always. • THE LOAN PROPOSAL.

Mr Barrowclough referred to a statement by Mr Hay that the loan proposal was turned down by the public because the price asked by the company was too high Mr Hay: “That was one reason. It was why I voted against it myself.”

Mr Barrowclough said that before submitting tlio proposal to-the Loans Board the corporation advertised its intention to raise a loan, and asked for objections. The only objection came from u linn of solicitors, acting for a

mini her of ratepayers, the ground of the objection being that, the public claimed it had the right to use the Arcade as a thoroughfare. Mr 'Huy said that could not be put in as evidence. Mr Rarrowelough said lie thought it only right that the suggestion by Air Hay should be answered. The only objection received was that the property was public prdiierty. THE DEFENCE OPENED. Air Fainnaid, in opening the case for the defence, said that in tho first Arcade there was persistent obstruction, and when the matter was tested before the court in those days the magistrate decided that it was private property. It would also be shown that there were gates on the old Arcade and that there was a dance hall across the fairway. His Honour: “Was there not an entrance below it? Was it not. high enough to allow of traffic being unimpeded?” Air Barrowelough said the hall was like an arch over the top. Air Fainnaid went on to say that between 1866 and 1876 there was continual obstruction by goods in the fairway. From T 876 practically down to tho present day there was obstruction by tho exposure of goods. In 1881 permanent stands wore erected in tho centre and on the skies. His Honour remarked that it must have been a sinuous progress to get through. “Like an Eastern mart,” added Air Barrowelough.

Afr Fainnaid said that in 1875 tho surface was asphalted, and vehicular traffic and traffic by animals was stopped. “ Y’on say it cannot he a highway unless it is open to all kinds of traffic.” said His Honour.

Mr Faii-maid: “Yes.” The roof, added counsel, was put on in 1875. On the occasion of the reopening in 1875 a charge of a shilling a head was made at the concert, and there was an attendance of nearly I,GOO in the “ so-called public; thoroughfare.” In 1875 other gates were erected at both ends. His Honour; “You say a highway mn-t be an uninterrupted way?” Mr Fail-maid: “Yes.” TALL, PORTLY BEADLE. A further ' interruption was the appointment of the beadle in 1875, said Air Eairmaid. His duty was “to maintain order, to see that the premises arc kept clean, and that the gas lights arc attended to at night.” In the paper of October 2G, 1875, the beadle liad a paragraph all to himself. His Honour: ft is a very important question, Air Eairmaid. 'The paragraph read that about a fortnight ago an advertisement had appeared calling for a tall, portly man capable of filling the distinguished position of beadle in the Royal Arcade. After days of anxious search a man ol requisite height, bulk, and weight and awe-inspiring appearance bad taken Jus preliminary canter in the “ Royal.” The paper congratulated Earley on the selection of a man to create awe in the hearts of the juvenile. His staff was described as being like “a well-turned bed post.” “ Now, sir,” said Air Eairmaid, “ that paragraph is important from another point of view, in that by October, 1875, this place bad lost the name of Fleet street, and the name of the Royal Arcade had not only been resumed by Earley, but the papers had adopted the name.” A Air Tonkinson would give evidence that about 1884 or 1885 the fairway was obstructed for some days by wooden bars and a chain. His Honour: At which end? Air Eairmaid : At the High street end. Mr Braithwaite would also say that be saw chains there from time to time. In tbo ’nineties the shop fronts on the upper side at the High street end were brought out from four to live feet into the fairway. About that time, or a little previous, the band stand was erected. “Was the band stand supported?” asked His Honour. Air Eairmaid : By iron supports. His Honour: Were there not wooden supports at the corner? 1 might be relying 100 much on my memory. NO DEDICATION. In 1900 the Drainage Board proposed, under its statutory power, to lay a sewer’through the Arcade, but the owners refused permission, continued counsel. In 1921 ami again in 1924 the corporation was asked by the owners to supply power for lighting purposes, but the corporation refused, stating the Arcade was a priva'te way. All tins, he submitted, went to show that the Arcade laid not been dedicated by the owner or owners. Even the acts ol the lessees did not amount to dedication. His Honour; Do yon say that the lessees could not dedicate? Mr Eairmaid: Yes, sir. Y e say that even if Earley had been the Ireeholdc-r his acts shovr no intention of dedication. His Honour:- And if he intended to do so, you say he had no power in law. A VOLUAHNOUS CORRESPONDENT. “Yes,” replied Air Eairmaid. In 1575, when the Arcade was blocked and who 11 further interruptions occurred, there were no protests Irom the public. It was obvious that the public acquiesced In what was Rone then. In October of that year “Citizen ” had written to the morning paper suggesting that Manse street should be continued through to Alaclaggan street by the acquiring of U. B. Martin's lease above the Arcade. “Citir.cn stated that Hie Arcade had been blocked to traliic.

.Mr May: Me would have used the Arcade if it had been a public highway. Mr Barrowclongh; He was a voluminous writer to the papers. “ But yon don’t know who lie was,” added Mr Faitumid.

“Yes, 1 do,” replied Mr Barrowclongh. “Me was an hotelkeeper named Pahloviteh, who had an axe to grind. Mis Mononr; Mo might have claimed compensation. Mr Barrowclongh: N r o. His property adjoined the proposed highway. Mr Hay: Do yon know that I’ahlovit.cli was “Citizen”?

Mr Barrowclongh: Yes. Wo have the letters.

“Yon must have second sight,” remarked Mr Hay.

Mr Fail-maid read the discussions at the City Council on the proposal to continue Manse street through to Maelaggan street at a cost of £7.000, and its rejection by the council. There was no protest by the council against the closing of the Arcade. No public money had been expended on the Arcade, save for the water main, which was probably installed for public safety, as there was a big block of buildings between Princes and Clark streets.

In 1908 an Arcade shopkeeper, Abraham Israel w r as charged with expectorating in the Arcade, but the ease was dismissed on the grounds that the Arcade was not under the control of the City Corporation. When Israel had later telephoned the police to take some action on a complaint the police refused, on the grounds that the Arcade was private property. Mr Fairmaid was oroceeding to traverse the history of the leases from Daniel Campbell to Farley when the court adjourned till 9.15 p.m.