LOWER HUTT'S NAME.

Hutt News, Volume 20, Issue 16, 18 September 1946, Page 5

LOWER HUTT'S NAME.

(To the Editor.) Sir,—From newspaper reports and editorials it would appear that Councillor Gregory objects to the move by the business community of Lower Hutt City to have the word "Lower" dropped from the city's title. Local businessmen can give Mr. Gregory many instances of contusion because of the retention of i lie word "Lower" and many instances of commercial difficulties in view of the suburban atmosphere created by that unfortunate term "Lower Hutt." The name "Hutt City." while far from ideal, at least directs attention to the fact that our city is no longer merely a .suburb. li is rather interesting to note that the "Hutt News" has taken up the cudgels in favour of the diehards. Your remarks in connection with the possibility of other cities adding Ihe word "City" to their names are irrelevant, because no other city has .iad to overcome the suburban slur .o such an extent. The "Hutt News" in this editorial said, "Why call the city by a name it does not legally possess?" If the legal position is to be introduced it may surprise many people to know that Lower Hutt is no more the legal title than Hutt City. In the pro'la.mation declaring the borough a :uty, the title was gazetted as Lower -lutt City. Under the Municipal Corporations Act there was no power :o change the name, or any part of the name, of a city or borough. This .jower was given during the present session, under the Geographic Names Act, the procedure being that a Geographic Board will have authority to approve a petition signed by a majority of citizens. If it is desirable that the name should be changed—and the "Hutt News" admits this—the opportunity is there or the Ratepayers' Association and the" Chaihber of Commerce to take lie necessary action. In the meantime, from a legal point of view, it is no more incorrect to drop the "Lower" than to drop the "City."—l am, etc., HUTT CITIZEN. I The "Hutt News" did not take sides on the question of the name if the city. It stated that at pre;ent the name was not "Hutt City," and to call it by a name that it did not possess was foolish. It suggested that if a change was desired, for admittedly the word "Lower" gave a wrong impression, the t proper steps should be taken to make the change.—Ed., "Hutt News."]