ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

New Zealand Herald and Auckland Gazette, Volume I, Issue 42, 12 January 1842, Page 2

ORIGINAL CORRESPONDENCE.

To the Editor of the New Zealand Herald and Auckland Gazette, Mr. Editor, In your paper of the 1 st instant, under the head of “ Police Intelligence, 1 ’ you report an “ important case,” where Mr. Montefiore appeared before the Magistrates, to complain that the street, Waterloo Quadrant, wiiere the complainant had purchased some allotments at the town sale, had been encroached upon no less than 36 feet. 1f36 feet are proposed to be taken off cneof the public streets where the allotments have been sold, there can be no question that the case is a very important one to the public as well as to the individuals more immediately interested, whose properties will thereby be seriously injured; and I feel considerable surprise, Mr. Editor, at tbe very unsatisfactory manner in which you have reported the case. Why, you do not furnish any particulars whatever, not eyen the name of the party complained against, and the matter altogether is treated as if you deemed it, either of no importance to the public; or, as if you had a positive wish to withhold, so far as possible, the real facts of the case.

Tn t he twqsfollowing numbers of your paper I expected to have seen some Editorial remarks on a case of such extreme importance to the public, but you have still passed it over in silence, for which I can see no good reason, seeing that the encroachment in question has been intimated from the Bench, to be in accordance with the Law on the subject, and as there can therefore be no propriety ,in withholding all the facts of the case, I trust you will give a place in your next to the following remarks, that the attention of the public may be fully called to the case, and that they may now understand, that the streets may be diminished to any extent at the discretion of the Sur-veyor-General ! and may estimate the value of their allotments accordingly. That the facts of the case may be understood, allow me to state, that Waterloo Quadrant is immediately in front of Government House, and that the street or roadway, as laid out on the Surveyor-General’s plan, is 66 feet wide, and that various individuals at the TowrvSale, (complainant amongst the number,) purchased allotments iu tliis street, for which they were compelled to pay enormous sums. It is believed, that at the time of the sale, His Excellency was not aware that the allotments in this street were intended to be sold, aud the proximity of them to Government House, might have found a sufficient reason to have kept them out of the sale. Be this as it may ; the fact is, that the allotments were actually sold with frontage to a street ot 66 feet wide, and a correspondingly high price paid for them. That His Excellency now wishes to reauce said street from 66 feet to 30 feet, aud a fence is now being erected accordingly. The case alluded to before the Magistrates, was to have this fence removed, as being an encroachment to the public stree - . Any plain unsophisticated person would at once have supposed that this was an encroachment, and that of no ordinary dimensions, and would have ordered its instant removal; but it has been decided by the Magistrates, that their jurisdiction does not extend (o such cases, as they no doubt best knew their own power, and the public cannot object to their decision so far ; but the public have a very decided interest in objecting to the doctdce intimated from the Bench, viz.—“ That Her Majesty’s Government can make any alterations they please, either to enlarge or reduce a road upon the testimony of the Surveyor-General, supported, by two Magistrates , I cannot pretend to acknowledge the law on the subject, but the doctrine is so grossly inconsistent with common sense and common honesty, that I venture to say, Mr. Editor, you have erroneously reported the opinion of the judge. If 36 feet at the discretion of the Sui yeyor-Generalcan be taken off Waterloo Quadrant, 36 teet may also be taken off Shortland Crescent or any other street in town, and I would ask if a greater breach of faith, a greater fraud on the purchasers and public could be devised, than to lake one foot of ground off Shortland Crescent, or indeed off any street where the allotments have been sold to the public. It is true that the allotments only, and not the streets are sold; but there is most certainly a solemn covenant made with the purchasers, that they are to have right to the streets where the allotments are situated, and of such a width as shewn on the plan, and which the seller cannot afterwards diminish one inch without committing a fraud upon tthe purchasers, or without making them aniple compensition for the injury done their properties, I cannot therefore believe it to be law, tor l am sure it is not honest and just, that the testimony ot the Surveyor-General, supported by 50 Magistrates, should be sufficient to take one inch of ground off a public street, where the allotments in that street have been sold to the public. But if the Surveyor-General really posseses such power, the sooner the public are aware of this the. better; that in future some distinct pledge

or agreement may be entered into befire any purchases are made. As an illustration of the manner in which similar cases are managed amongst the public themselves, I may menn tion one which lately came under my own r observation, where a certain party sub-divided his allotment, leaving a road way up the centre, and in selling out the allotments disposeed of one inch of frontage more than he had right to, hut rather than take this one inch off the road way, which he had marked in his plan, he agreed to give the owner of the adjoining property £5 stlg, for one inch of ground to make up for that which he was deficient. This single fact —for it is a fact—is worth a thousand arguments on the subject, and amply pr ves the complete understanding of the public as well as the sacred obligation on them to abide by the consequences ; that wiiere allotments are sold to a street of a certain width, that such street cannot, with justice to the purchasers be afterwards reduced one inch in breadth, and if the street in question is diminished as proposed, the public will loose all faith in making purchases, from Government, and the example will be imitated by private individuals for committing frauds upon each other. Instead of six feet lanes, as we now have in this Government patent-concentrated Town, individuals will afterwards show handsome streets of thirty or forty feet width, and when the allotments are sold, and the money pocketed, will afterwards reduce the streets to the more desireabie size of six or ten feet, according to their own fancy, supported bv the gentlemen who drew the > plan, with a few other equally disinterested persons. Admit one principle of injustice in our dealings, and no one can tell where it may lead us, or estimate the amount of evil, direct and indirect, which may be the consequence of it. JUSTITIA.