BATHS FOR DIXIELAND.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19798, 19 November 1927, Page 12

BATHS FOR DIXIELAND.

COMMITTEE'S INQUIRY. WOMEN GIVE EVIDENCE-; VARIOUS OBJECTIONS RAISED. DANGER TO SANDY BEACH. Whether Dixieland, Limited, shall be given a permit to erect baths at Point Chevalier is the question to be decided by the special committee of inquiry, appointed by the Government, which commenced its sittings yesterday. The evidence of several objectors was heard, and the inquiry was adjourned until this morning. As several more witnesses are to bo called, it is expected the inquiry will continue on Monday. The committe comprises Mr. G. C. Godfrey, secretary to the Marine Department, Wellington, and Mr. L. B. Campbell, district engineer of Public Works, Auckland. Mr. E. H. Northcroft appears for Dixieland, Limited, and Mr. J Stanton for the City CounciL After outlining events that led to the inquiry, Mr. Godfrey said objections to the erection of the baths had been received from the City Council, Civic League, National Council of Women, Auckland Women's Temperance Union, Y.W.C.A., Point Chevalier Sailing Club, and the women's probation officer. Tho objectors did not seem specific as to any ground of objection, and he desired that in giving evidence they should state their grounds. Protection of the Beach. On behalf of the Civic League, Mrs. D. W. McLean said that if baths were erected at Point Chevalier it would create a precedent in the taking away of the beaches from the women and children. They thought this might be the thin edge of tho wedge. In their opinion it would be a bad policy to give away any part of the foreshore. Speaking on behalf of the mothers, Mrs. M. S. Benfell said tho beaches should be preserved for the children. Major Annie Gordon, women's proba-' tion officer, said she was very jealous of Point Chevalier Beach. She understood that if baths were erected they would not be under the control of the City Council. She very strongly objected to baths being erected there. Other women also voiced objections along similar lines. Mr, Godfrey: You ladies seem to think the whole of the beach will be taken away. The area will be a very small one. A Voice: I quite understand. I would object even if a foot were taken. Mr. Godfrey: Supposing the City Council erected the baths ? A Voice: That would be all right. We are part of the City Council. (Laughter.) In reply to Mr. Godfrey, Miss Alice Basten, a member of the City Council, said she objected to the erection of baths by a private company in any part of New Zealand. She would • not object so much to the erection of baths by the City Council. Danger to Sand Coating. Mr. Stanton said the City Council had two main grounds for objection. The erection of baths on the proposed site would create a serious menace to the beach. The preservation of the beach was a matter of supreme importance. The present coating of sand and shell was very thin, and it would take verylittle interference to denude it of that coat and turn it into a mud plot. _ The second main objection was that the council, in view of its position as custodian of the public interests, objected to private baths being erected. In no case did the proceeds from City Council baths exceed the expenditure. The proposed baths at Point Chevalier would have to be made to pay—and pay in a way that might not be desirable. The council believed the proximity of the baths to the cabaret would not be in the best interests of public welfare. It believed the best position for baths to be on the north-eastern side of the point. The council was not adopting any "dog in the manger" attitude. * t Mr. Godfrey: Are you in a position to tell us whether baths would be erected if left in the council's hands! Mr. Stanton: I do not know. Counsel added the City Council realised the advisability of erecting baths at Point Chevalier, but did not think the matter was pressing. The patronage accorded the council's baths at Parnell and Ponsonby was such that the erection of baths at Point Chevalier would not be justified by the patronage that might be expected. Objection on Moral Grounds. At this' stage Mr. Northcroft was given permission to ask questions. In reply to a question, Mrs. M. Cole, representing the Y.W.C.A., admitted the main ground of her objection was that baths in the locality might endanger the morals of the girls. Mr. Northcroft: Is it because it is Dixieland ? Mrs. Cole: Not at all. Mr. Northcroft: Might I ask any of the ladies whether they are objecting because it is Dixieland ? There was a chorus of noes in reply. One lady said she would object to any private company erecting baths. Mr. W. E. Bush, city engineer, was then called. He said it was his considered opinion that if baths were erected, the beach would become denuded of a large amount of its sand and shell. The best position for a baths was on the eastern side of the trig-station. There was a little sheltered bay there admirably suited for the erection of baths. In reply to Mr. Northcroft, Mr. Bush said the demand for night bathing in Auckland was very limited. Unless baths were very well lighted, there was always a danger of a drowning accident. Mr. Northcroft: Between Dixieland nnd the baths, the sand will not be interfered with. An overhead will connect them?— Mr. Bush: I understand that. Examined further, Mr. Bush said the City Council had no money earmarked for baths this year. Harbour Engineer's Views. Mr. D. Holderness, engineer to the Auckland Harbour Board, said ho considered the sand, at present evenly spread over the beach, would accumulate at the base of the proposed baths from either end, leaving the southern portion of the beach particularly denuded of sand. Mr. J. B. Paterson, a member of the Parks Committeo of the Auckland City Council, said the beach was an exceedingly safe one for children. Many beaches around Auckland had been ruined through being "commercialised.'" Any baths should be constructed above highwater mark. Mr. Paterson quoted figures for the year 1925-26, showing losses sustained on city baths. Mr. Northcroft: You have been activo in your protests against Dixieland ?—Mr. Paterson: I have seen things that hava hnppenedr- From the moral aspect ho did not think it suitable that a cabaret and baths should be placed side by side. Mr. Northcroft: Is not the real reason that tho City Council does not want Dixieland to havo a licence?— Any cabaret at all. At this stage the inquiry was adjourned until this morning.