SEDDON STREET

Manawatu Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 2307, 27 November 1925, Page 7

SEDDON STREET

[To the Editor.] Sir—From tho report of Mr. Milverton's meeting lest night and from what one can gather from conversailon with ratepayers generally it would appear that there is a considerable amount of doubt as to the exact position of affairs relative to Seddon street and the expenditure of public moneys thereon. A clear statement of fact, not from one side or the other, but from an unbiassed and judicial standpoint may be summarised as follows: 1 Palmerston North was constituted a Borough in 1877 and in 188 2 a subdivisions! plan showed Scddon street in addition to other streets laid out therein. 2 On the said plan is a certificate under the s eal of the Corporation that the Council had given its consent to the laying off of the streets (Including Seddon street) outlined oc the plan. 3. By section 2 3 of the Municipal Corporations Act 187 G Amendment Act 187 8 the term street was defined as including "any public highway’ Hereafter to be laid out within n Borough by or with the sanction of the Council. This Act remained in force until January 1, 1887. when it was superseded by the Act of 18 8G which in turn became the Act of 1908 and later the Act of 1920. 4 The Municipal Solicitor, in his 'pinion dealing with the question of ■ho necessity of a special order before a street laid out in a Borough car. I'ecome a public street, quotes the ease of Bunny v. The Mastorton Borough Council (1903). In the course of his judgment in that case. His Honour tho Chief Justice said’ "In my opinion nil that was necessary to create a road laid off by a private owner a public street was to get me Council’s sanction. A special order was not necessary and the sanction was obtained.” That is exactly the position of Seddon street. The Municipal Solicitor, in his opinion, further points out that ny section 171 of the Municipal Corporations Act 1920 "a street” is defined as being any land which immediately before the constitution of the Borough under that Act was a public highway under the control as such of any Borough Council; and that section 385 provides that all "streets lawfully existing in any Borougn on the coming into operation of this Act shall be deemed to be the same streets under this Act.” The Municipal Solicitor then says “in my opinion the street In question (Seddon street) was under the control as such or the Council notwithstanding the fencing off and non-use thereof. Summing up the legal position, the Municipal Solicitor says: “I am of the opinion therefore that the street in question (Seddon street) became in 1882 and has ever since remained and is now a public street of the Borough. 7 Some time just prior to July, 1923, a deputation headed by Mr. Cohen waited „pon the Public Works committee of the Borough Council asking that Seddon street bo opened up and some work of formation be done thereon. 8 At the meeting of the Borough Council hold on October 18, 3933 it woe moved by Councillor Jackson, seconded by Councillor West: “That the Council proceed to open up Seddon street to form a roadway for a yjldth of 16 feot and also to construct a concrete bridge over tho Kawau stream at an estimated total cost of £1390, such estimate excluding cost of formation of the footpaths” As an amendment Oouncilloi

I lodgens moved and Councillor Canton seconded: ' “That the following words be added to the motion—subject to evidence being produced that Wood street was constructed out of ratepayers’ funds Further that the present property owners give a guarantee not to load the allotments with any charges on account of the construction of the road. The amendment lost and the motion on being put to the meeting was declared carried. 9 The decision of the Council to spend money on Seddon street was criticised in several quarters upon the ground that Nathans and the othei owners should have done the work and not the Council. Councillor Hodgcns In particular in his election speeches attacked the attitude of the Council as being illegal. 10 In order to clear up the above position upon the election of the present Council I moved that the opinion of the Municipal Solicitor be obtained in the whole matter. 11 When his opinion was presented to the Council I moved that a special committee consisting of His Worship the Deputy-Mayor. Councillors Eliott. Hodgens and Fitsdicrbert be set up with power to call evidence and report fully to the Council, 12 This committee duly met and hoard such evidence as was presented. The committee also considered the opinion of the Municipal Solicitor and came to the conclusion which was endorsed by the Council that Seddon street was a public street of tne Borough and as such entitled to its fair share of expenditure of public funds. 13 tn my humble opinion tne position is abundanth' clear. (a) In 1882 Seddon street became and is now a public street of the Borough just as Broad street, Fltzherbert street, McGiffert street and other streets are public streets. (b) Owing to the spread of the town not going in that direction Seddon street has not required the expenditure of public money on it till the present time. (c) As money becomes available and as necessity arises the Council must in justice spend money in work cn Seddon street as it spends money on its other streets, the only determining factor being the relative necessity of the various works required. Lastly. I must apologise for tres passing on your space at such length but I feel only thus can the misunderstandings that have arisen be removed. I am, etc., M. H. ORAM.