COTTAGES AT NGAMOTU

Taranaki Daily News, 19 July 1929, Page 12

COTTAGES AT NGAMOTU

“SOME SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED.”

HARBOUR BOARD SUPPORT GIVEN. Having discussed the suggested demolition of certain cottages on the Ngamotu beach with a deputation from the New Plymouth Borough Council, the Harbour Board decided yesterday that it would concur in any action considered advisable by the health authorities to secure the removal of the buildings occupied by Europeans and natives, but that no action should be taken against the Maoris until the Europeans had been dealt with. The board’s solicitor will be instructed to co-operate with the council in the matter.

The proposal was moved by Mr. E, Maxwell and seconded by Mr. J. R. Cruickshaiik.

“A matter that has been exercising the minds of both the council and board for some time is that relating to the insanitary, dilapidated and unhealthy cottages on the foreshore,” said the Mayor. “They were never intended for human habitation, having been erected originally for boat sheds. They have been added to piecemeal.” These cottages had been the subject of conferences between the council, the Health Department and the board for a number of years, said Mr. Griffiths, and at the end of 1928 the council gave notice to the board to demolish the cottages.

From time to time the board had done what it could, said the chairman (Mr. C. E. Bellringer), it was as anxious as the council to get rid of the buildings in question, but the difficulty was how to go about it. The Mayor said it was realised there were difficulties regarding the Maoris, but it had been understood in 1928 that their health was such that they were being urged by their own people to leave the locality. One of the natives refused to go, but it was understood that if the others went he would probably follow them eventually. If the Europeans could be got rid of first and then the Maoris, there seemed no reason why all the buildings concerned should not be demolished with benefit to j the whole community. The chairman said the board thought the Borough Council was the only body that could take action.

Mr. F. T. Bellringer (town clerk) said the council would have to take action against the board, and it was loth to do that. In any case, reference to the law w-ould be an expensive business and might even go to the Court of Appeal. Once the action was slirted the council would have to go on with it at a cost, probably, of hundreds of pounds. Mr. C. H. Burgess: What do you suggest the board might do? ° Mr. F. T. Bellringer «said that the boat’d, as the owner of the property, could do what it liked. The chairman: We own the land, but not the cottages. Mr. E. Maxwell endorsed the chairman’s views. He thought the board could not take action. He understood the board could not demolish the houses, but that the council could. As the council did not want to take action against the board, possibly the difficulty, could be got over by the. board concurring with the council i it took action against the owners. If that could not be done, then he suggested the council would have to go to court, and, expressing.his personal opinion, the board would not defend.

For years the board had wanted something done, but it would not be agreeable to the Maoris concerned being attacked first. If that happened trouble would be caused.

The chairman mentioned that on November 15, 1928, the board passed a resolution with reference to the council’s notice about demolition. The natives went away then, but returned in a very short time.

The Mayor: Our point is that you should have pulled down the cottages immediately. Mr. F. T. Bellringer; said the council

could not pull them down without an order from the court.

Referring to the cottages occupied by Europeans, the chairman said they were originally let to fishermen as boat sheds. Gradually the practice grew among them of coming down for week-ends and additions were made. They were never granted licenses to use the places as habitations. Several of the cottages were kept in a very clean condition, but, even so, it was not desirable that they should continue to be used as dwellings., ' Mr. G. M. Spence suggested another way of overcoming the difficulty was for the board to charge the occupants a 'substantial rent. Probably they would not pay it and then the board could sue for possession. Mr. D. J. Malone: What is the council’s attitude towards the other beach residences? Does this apply to the beach population generally?' Mr. F. T. Bellringer: It applies only to the cottages on the western side of the Hongi Hongi stream. The land on that side is sodden.

The Mayor said that when one stood on the floor boards of 'some of the cottages the mud oozed through.

Mr. Griffiths said he wondered whether a conference would be held of native leaders with a view to persuading the Maoris to leave voluntarily.*