Untitled

Otago Witness, Issue 801, 6 April 1867, Page 11

" &*&&<# 'tnat'^uflt'lnllvitdW^'ye '&rM' t I'j&qfc j&e .erenjs. Some' twq^ • years since;, i fh« eccarrence of v a•• fire less t disastrous «5n' 1 its results led' to the ' .formation 'of * Company for supplying tne City witli water. It seemed from the enthusiasm tfeen displayed, that every owner of property hailed the proposal' with, plea sture; but, strange to say, many held 'back from becoming shareholders in tin- " A. little reflection should have convinced them that a good supply of •tarter, with the pressure proposed, and the arrangements for extinguishing fire intended, would, when finished, add much " to: the security, and consequently, the value' of thejr property ; that the diminished rate of insurance, and reduction of risk consequent upon the completion of the ■works, would soon save annually a Bttiri equal to a handsome premium, and that they would in a few years save an amount equal to the full value of the property on the ground, while a dividend being guaranteed by the Provincial Go-, vemment insured handsome interest on the amount advanced. It is equally difficult to discover why such unwillingness was displayed to subscribe to so safe an investment as it ia to learn why more satisfactory progress has not been made with the works. Party considerations, where all are alike interested in avoiding a eonv .mon danger and securing a common benefit, seem, alto.getb.er out of place; even personal feelings, should they exist, should he subordinated in .every generous mind to the general good. If is possible that these may have had place in preventing that full support that should have been given to a plaa so beneficial and so profitable ; but if so, the consequences have been disastrous in the extreme, and must be productive of deep regret to any who, through such considerations, have withheld a helping hand. Even a full supply of water might have failed to extinguish the fire in the block in which it originated, but none can doubt it would have secured the safety of the property on the opposite side of the street. But although with respect to the inadequate supply of water for such an emergency, only general remarks apply, words cannot too strongly condemn that want of foresight that has neglected to arm some one with authority to pull down a timber building to stay the progress of fire. Were tbe owner present, and saw that its destruction by fire was inevitable if it were not pulled down, he could hardlj object to so reasonable a course. He might say itwas hard that his building should be sacrificed to secure the safety of that of his neighbor ; but as a community, it ia much harder that not only one but many should suffer. The pulling down of one building on Monday night would have saved many thousands of pounds, and much individual suffering and loss, but because no one was armed with authority to give the necessary directions, and because any one venturing to do so would have made himself personally liable for the value of the structure, building after building was burnt. The means for staying the progress of the fire were there, but all that could be done was to stand helplessly looking on. Whatever the state of the law, it seems absurd that the Corporation should not take the matter into consideration, and, on behalf of the city, hold the Mayor or Resident Magistrate harmless, should he deem it necessary to take such a step. It is as clearly a question of Municipal arrangement, as the regulation of cabs, and keeping the streets in repair. It is possible some short-sighted candidate for City honors might make compensation paid for such a purpose a theme for a lecture on retrenchment j but he would meet with few abettors, when it is evident that a few hundreds of pounds sacrificed would save more thousands, even if the full value of the property pulled down were awarded. The loss to the City of a building would be a trifle. Were it calculated accurately, there can be no doubt whatever that more has been lost in City rates . for the year, through the burning ia Princes street and the Octagon, than would have beea paid as compensation for the necessary buildings pulled down; bo that ia every view, whether

16b^e37^f^?^3m2[5irwc. civic interest, it would, have ( been , justifiable, to i pull «. building down and reimburse the owner 'out of .f&B City rates. •// ' ~ '''