ADMIRALTY HOUSE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XL, Issue 12402, 26 October 1903, Page 5

ADMIRALTY HOUSE.

DEPUTATION TO THE PREMIER,

PROBABLE• REPEAL iOF ADMIRALTY HOUSE ACT.

[BY* telegraph.— si j , CORESPONDENT.] ;'. .■'.': WisLUsqTONV Saturday. Mb. J. T. Julian, chjurraan of the Auckland Harbour.' Board, accompanied by . Messrs. Witheford, Batune, .'Fcwjcfs,' and Bollard, M.H.R.'s, waited on the Premier to-day and laid before him the position with regard to Admiralty House, with a'view to securing the Government's permission to lease the building. ■;".-."■ "''■■. ;■:'/■ !.' ■ :'■■ _ : : ■•■i'A typewritten statement of the history and present position of Admiralty House was laid before the Premier, showing' that, the Board had expended to date £3741, and that the annual cast, including.interest and maintenence, was £554. The proposal laid before the Premier in this statement was that permission might be 'granted' to lcaso- the house for a period of, say, 10 years, with three years' per- J manent occupation, and after that time occupation terminable upon.' six months' 'notice,, should the house and grounds be required for Admiralty purposes. Upon the termination of the lease (either by lapse of time or under conditions) the Government 'could then be called upon for nayment of the £1000 and the transfer of the old Admiralty House site. Mr. Julian said the Board had several applications to lease the house as a boardinghouse, and as it was costing the Board £10 a week in interest, maintenance, etc., anything was better than, allowing it to stand idle. ■ The Premier: Have you any: proposal to submit? ' Mr. Julian: Only that wo are prepared to. forego the £1000 and 'the site. The Premier: If you let it as a boardinghouse I suppose you don't expect the Admiral to go into'thV.'hoardinsjliouso? Mr. Julian said it was proposed to put a clause in ' the' lease that if the house was wanted foi the Admiral at any time after three years the Board would pay compensation to the tenant." '.".'"'' ''.',',' .'."-, '"-' / The Premier: .The position is simply one in which you want a dissolution of partnership? Mr. Fowlds: Or continue the partnership, and let the Government get a share of the revenue. "The Premier said ho thought the proper way to deal with it was to'dissolve the partnership. Two parties had come together for a given purpose. That purpose could not bo accomplished. The 'Admiral had refused to live in the house, a;ad there was the building, unique from in architectural point of view. (Laughter.) He had nude inquiries in various Departments lii's to tho house being suitable for Government office-!!, aid the replies had not been favourable. ■; He was always desirous of working in harmony with the local authorities in 'Auckland, ' and with tho people of Auckland, and if it was the general wish 'that something should bo done the best thing would, be for' the Auckland members to consult among themselves, and ifthe members recommend it he would consult tho Cabinet with a view" to dissolving the partnership 1 and allowing tho Board to do as it liked with the house. He could meet the situation by bringing in a Bill to repeal tho Admiralty House Act, 1353, which would let the Government keep the old Admiralty House and the £1000., . and the Board could do as it pleased. If the Auckland members met and said there would bo no objection, then the Cabinet could decide and tho Bill will go through. Mr. Baume said it was just a question of whether the Harbour Board was willing to relinquish all claim on the £1000 and the site of old Admiraltv House. Mr. Julian: Yes, that is tho feeling of tho Board. ' :,' : Mr. Fowlds. That is the feeling rather than continue to lose £500 a year: but I think the ■'.Government should bear some of tho loss on the partnership. ■'■■. Mr. Baume: Would the Government allow the Board to lease it for a boardiisghouse providing that it should be available at any time for the original purpose 1 on six months' notice ? ' ■' -"■■ '■." ■ ' . ■ ■■: The Premier : My feeling is that there is an incompa tabiliny in : the partnership, and that the best thing is to grant a separation. I think'the chairman of the Harbour Board came to Wellington' to get a separation order. *■■ ■ '":■■ " : ' '"'■•' '' :■' '' '•'', - . , , Mr.' Baunie: Ther«i. is a remote possibility that 1 some day the : Admiral' may" live in the house,"and it might be as well to make provision that oh' reasonable, notice the "house could be obtained for the original purpose. Tho Premier: Wall, we have a bouse of our own which is "'■. apparently quite good enough for admiralty''■purposes..-.:; The Admiral' won't come to our premises, and he won't come '\ to/ yours. [Yon know the Government refused permission to the Board to grant a 10 years"- lease, and now there is a desire for a-'decree nisi. '';■"■[ Mr. Bollard '• Has Mr. Julian the authority of ; the Board to '.cut the painter with regard to the £1000. and the site 1 Mr. Julian: I think if the necessity arose we would be in a position to give the Admiral a house. Tli» Government has one nearly as good as oars. The- Premier:' "We'll take the responsibility. " "'' r ' - -:, '" '""' ' Mr. Fowlds said "ho Government and the Board entered into a- partnership which had resulted in a loss. He thought the Government should bear wane of the loss if there was to be a split iE the partnership. Then the Board should get the £1000. *" 'The Premier said there was no repudiation on the part of the Government. They had no responsibility until the Board got the Admiral to occupy the house. '■' Mr. Julian: I admit the onus is upon us to get the Admiral in. The Premier: And the colony has got nothing for its £1000. It, has not got an admiral. * •' Mr. Fowlds: Nor has the Board for its £3000. ' ""' i. :';' ';.' '•'•■: •'.

The Premier raid the conception was a good one. Mr. "Witheford had succeeded in getting the equipment of Calliope Dock, and

it was thought Mint the erection of an admiral's house would result" in the removal of the headquarters of the Australasian squadron from Sydney to Auckland. Unfortunately it did not come- off, and the question was whetiaec it was likely to eventuate. It was agreed, as suggested by the- Premier, that the Auckland members would consult on the matter, and intimate whether they are unanimous in accepting the dissolution of partnership.