JEWISH HALL

Sun (Auckland), Volume I, Issue 139, 2 September 1927, Page 6

JEWISH HALL

SITE IN GRAVEYARD CITY COUNCIL APPROACHED VIGOROUS OPPOSITION “T object to the alienation of city property without consideration,” protested Cr. Melville, when the City Council, last evening, was considering a recommendation that the council consent to legislation authorising the transfer, to the Hebrew congregation, of a part of the Jewish Cemetery in Karangahape Road. Her objection started a discussion •hat lasted nearly an hour, was at iraes spirited, and ended in the reection of the recommendation, in fav>ur of an amendment that the proposition be given further consideration. “It is a public reserve,” said Cr. A. T. Entrican, “and I don’t see that we have the right to consent.” He pointed out that a condition of the transfer would be that a Hebrew Communal Memorial Hall be erected on the land. EIGHTY YEARS BACK Supporting the recommendation, Cr. AY- H. Murray traced ancient history. For use as a burial ground the land was first handed over to the Jewish community in 1843, and for many years, Messrs John Montefiore and David Nathan were the trustees. The Symonds Street burial grounds were closed by Order-in-Council in 190 S. The Jewish community had always cooperated with the City Council. Cr. L. A. Eady: The moral obligation to grant the request outweighs the legal aspect. Ci. Alice Hasten said she had been assured that no obstacle would be placed in the way of the resumption of the land, Cor municipal purposes, if the necessity ever arose. Cr. G. Knight: We have no power to hand the land over. When Cr. Murray gets further information lie will find that he was much astray from the true facts of the case. VALUATION ON CEMETERY Cr. Stallworthy: What is the city valuer’s valuation of the land? Cr. J. A. C. Allum: We don’t value cemeteries. Cr. Stallworthy said the Jewish community had no legal or moral claim to the land, except for cemetery purposes. If they allowed this land to bo alienated, they could not refuse similar requests from elsewhere. Cr. Crookes said he had been approached concerning the request, and had been led to believe that the Hebrew congregation originally held the freehold title of the land, but handed it over to the City Council as a gracious concession. According to the city’s officers, however, that was not Touching on Miss Basten’s suggestion that there would be no objection to resumption, if necessary, Cr. Crookes said there would always be an obstacle, once the title was surrendered. It had been said that the Hebrew people would not, owing to a form in their ritual, go to law over such a

matter, but in applying for legislation to transfer from the cty, he contended they were, actually, going to law. Voices: No. SUPPORTERS OUTVOTED Cr. Allum said it was ridiculous for Cr. Stallworthy to suggest, for many years at least, that the land had any commercial value. Cr. Brinsden paid a tribute to the generosity of the Jewish people in allowing the council to form a rest reserve on the corner. Eleven voted for an amendment that the committee’s recommendation be referred back, and the amendment was thus carried•