The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, May 2, 1947. CASE FOR LEASEHOLDERS

Grey River Argus, 2 May 1947, Page 4

The Grey River Argus FRIDAY, May 2, 1947. CASE FOR LEASEHOLDERS

LAST night’s public- meeting proved a contrast, as striking as it was inevitable, to the propaganda by which it was heralded. No doubt the grossly alarmist note was struck in the preliminary publicity—to the effect that the town might be “doomed”—with the object, not of giving Greymouth a very bad reputation in the rest of the country, but rather of mustering the good attendance which it may have assisted to obtain. But when it came to substantiating those extravagant assertions, those present mostly have felt it to have been something of an anti-climax. At the same time, it is only reasonable to acknowledge that all interested leaseholders have every justification in defending what they regard, with assurance, as their rights, not merely individually, but also collectively. Therefore. the speakers generally deserve commendation for leaving niit the note of exaggeration and for arguing their case logically and, as it were, ah origine. The Mayor, for instance, illustrated, a point rather exceptional to this community, that, although so largely limited to leasehold tenure from the very outset, it has borne in rating the whole cost of municipal development, whil.-.t the property as a freehold has remained no more than a native endowment. Incidentally, the complaint that, rentals have risen to £BOOO per annum is no serious one when compared with the aggregate valuation of the native reserve for purposes either. of rating or of sale on the 1942 valuation. What is open to question is that the Crown derives as much from the rental as the original beneficiary, per medium of taxation, and to that extent cannot very well plead that benevolence is the only motive . of the endowment. Incidentally, in other municipalities where there are leaseholds, the values are not speculatively .raised, nor consequently the rentals, because, compared to the custom locally, the competitive factor does not usually enter into the renewals any more than, it does here, whilst holders are not prone to indulge in sales at speculative prices. It is undeniable that, the utility of the native reserve here owes its very considerable growth to the municipal taxation upon the lessees, who. to that extent, have collectively an equity which cannot be denied. At the. same time, there is, in specially interested quarters, where sale, rather than, holding, is the consideration, a disposition to jump at a conclusion that because the Crown questions the criteria of the Lands Sales Committee. the Land Sales Court is bound to find that there is no case but a Crown, case. At last night’s meeting, even if the crack of doom was conspicuous by its absence, it was nevertheless shown that there may be a ease to justify the claim that custom is to be credited alike by a Lands Sales Committee and a Land Sales Court. It is one thing to say this, question shall not be legally decided and quite another to say that- it should be decided according to the precedents which have begn hitherto followed since the nearly days when the very low |L<~ 2-'

rental and the municipal or community enterprise combined to create a so-called il goodwill”. If it be a question of deciding whether such goodwill belongs to those who must be regarded as having largely created it by payment of rates and otherwise,, and somebody else, then, as having concerted rights, the lessees could not be denied their interest in. it, nor could this share be ignored by the Court. On the other hand, to imply that the equity of leaseholders is so valuable as to bulk more largely even than improvements, for which every allowance is made in the sales, is to court, scepticism. The fact that rentals have risen was emphasised, last evening, whereas it is doubtful, in the light of the argument that values have risen in a multiple degree, whether any other property of the same dimensions would, after 80 years, in a rising community, have remained leas able anywise so cheaply as it is to-day. This cheapness is in itself an advantage. If the reserve should be submitted to purchase, it is at least probable that people who insist now upon maintaining a standard of values which has gradually risen would be most eloquent in proving that this standard would be too high at which to buy. The thing cuts more ways than one, and therefore no harm need result from a Land Court decision.