Council Stands Firm On Cathedral Square Scheme.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 18546, 21 August 1928, Page 4

Council Stands Firm On Cathedral Square Scheme.

BREEZES OCCUR BETWEEN MAYOR AND LEADERS OF DEPUTATION. «jyp LORD ” Thin was the way in which Mr George Gould addressed the Mayor (the Rev .7. K. Archer) last evening when a large deputation—one of the largest that have vet waited on the councilmade a protest against the proposal to construct conveniences in the centre of Cathedral Square. The Mayor took exception to Mr Gould’s words and asked for an apology, which was given and accepted. The council did not pass a motion on the matter.

The spokesmen for the deputation were closely questioned by the Mayor and several of the councillors regarding the intentions of the pioneers. During the proceedings a couple o 4 “breezes” occurred, Mr C. E. Boon and Mr George Gould being called on by the Mayor to apologise for their behaviour. After xhe deputation had retired the council discussed the question at length. No motion was passed, the Mayor stating that the council had already reached a decision to go ahead with the scheme. He desired to see the work commenced at the earliest possible date. Letters expressing opposition to the council's proposals were received from Mr George Gould, Mr A. D. Hassali. Canon Wilford, Mr R. E. Green and Florence A. Turner. The Canterbury Trades and Labour Council wrote congratulating the council on its attitude in regard to the matter. GREAT PUBLIC INTEREST.* The Mayor, the Rev J. K. Archer, said he would like to apologise to the members of the deputation for not being able to offer them all seats. Whatever might be their views regarding the question of the Square scheme, it must be a source .of mutual satisfaction to find that so much interest was aroused. The greatest enemy of civic progress was apathy, and he was glad that on this question the people had overcome their natural apathy. Mr George Gould introduced the deputation. He stated that it was representative of a very large body of public opinion which was averse to the council’s proposals in regard to the Square. The views of the deputation would be expressed by Mr W. Machin and Mr George Harper.

Mr Machin said that the members o ( the deputation were much obliged to the council for giving them an opportunity of expressing their views in regard to the proposal to provide permanent lavatories in the Square. The deputation was not against the provision of such conveniences, as it recognised that they were necessary. Fur thermore, the deputation had no ulterior motive, and was not trying to preserve the site for some other scheme The members of the deputation came with disinterested motives as plain, ordinary citizens with the welfare of the city at heart. They deprecated any references to their ability to at tend meetings at 4.30 in the afternoon or the quality of their citizenship. AN OPEN SPACE. The reason for the opposition to the council’s proposals, Mr Machin added, was that from the earliest times it had always been desired that the Square should be preserved as an open space. From its beginning the tram shelter had been regarded merely as a temporary structure because the Square was still looked upon as an open space. Acts of Parliament had preserved the wishes of the pioneers in connection with the matter. The pioneers had given the present citizens a goodly inheritance in the Square and it should be preserved. The traffic problem was in a state of flux at the present time and he believed that if the proposed permanent structure was erected it would be regretted in the years to come because it would be irrevocable. One-way traffic was being considered, and it would be a pity to proceed with something that was irrevocable. The day would tome when some bright and useful scheme would be put forward for making the centre of the city what it was originally intended to be. Another aspect of the matter was that the lavatories would face the facade of the Cathedral. They were not all Anglicans, but they believed that the idea of putting veiled conven-

iences in front of such a noble building •would be. as great a mistake as it would be to put such a structure in front of Buckingham Palace. They believed that To place such a building in the central place in the city—a place that all eyes would turn to as the Cathedral was admired —would be a mistake. The Square was the great possession in the corporate life of the community, where vast crowds assembled for moments of great sorrow and also for moments of great rejoicing. It was the deputation's hope that the council would reconsider its proposals. He believed that it was not beyond the ability of the City Engineer to suggest some other site where equally useful conveniences could be provided. “A CHEAP PARTY VICTORY.” Turning to the Mayor, Mr Machin said that it was a domestic question and he appealed to him as Chief Magistrate of the city to reconsider the matter. He did not think that the Mayor would attempt to gain a cheap party victor j r . He knew that there were hundreds of people in the city willing to meet the officers of the council and discuss suitable alternatives to what they considered would be a disaster in putting this pile of buildings in the \oud applause followed the conclu slon of Mr Machin’s speech. Mr George Harper said he had hopec that a younger man would have ad dressed the council that night insteac of himself, one who could have spoker of what the Square should be in the future. He could only speak of the past. Under an Act of Parliament o 1877 the Square was handed over tc the City Council. In a leading articl< published in the “ Lyttelton Times ” ii 1577 it was urged that the greatest pre cautions should be taken to see tlia the Square was preserved as a public and that no buildings shoulc be erected on it. The article expressed the hope that the Square should at all times be kept for the use of the people of the city. The object of the Act was that the Square should be kept for all time for the purposes for which it was set aside. He hoped the council would see that the purposes of the Act were carried out. The Square had been set aside for the purposes of «»**Vens and an open space.

“ ROAD THROUGH THE SQUARE.” Councillor D. G. Sullivan, M.P., asked if it was a fact that the Cathedral authorities had asked that a road should be put through the Square. Mr Harper said it was not the Cathedral authorities who asked for the road through the Square. The road had been put through by the Provincial Council. The Cathedral authorities had insisted that the road should be only a chain wide. Councillor Sullivan asked if it were a fact that for years there were conveniences in the Cathedral grounds. Mr Harper: Not in the actual Cathedral grounds, though there may have been conveniences there for the work-> men engaged on the building of the Cathedral. “There was a sort of convenience at the back of the Godley Statue 1 Councillor H. T. Armstrong, M.P. (tc Mr Machin): Your ultimate intention is that you should clear the spot of the present tram shelter and conveniences and have no conveniences there at all? Mr Machin said that he was nosure what their ultimate intentions

were. What they wished to do at pre- t sent was to prevent anything like per- r manent buildings being erected in the t Square. c Councillor Armstrong: Will you tell c us what you want? After all we want r the advice of citizens. We want to c do what will please the citizens of p Christchurch. a Mr Machin said t!hai as regarded c drawing up plans for the improvement t of the Square the Committee that they f represented had not the ability to do c that. That was a matter for the ex- c perts. They believed that the centre F of the Square could be used for some- i thing better than a veiled convenience, f Councillor Armstrong: We .think the 5 buildings at present there are a dis- v grace to the city. We want something F better. t Mr Machin: We agree with you but ® suggest that there are better places in which conveniences can be put. a MR GOULD APOLOGISES TO THE J MAYOR. c At this stage another “ breeze ” oc* c curred. j Mr Gould, who had introduced the deputation, interrupted to ask if he t could make a statement. He began r his remarks by addressing the Mayor ? as “ my lord/ 5 1 The Mayor took strong exception to > this, and added that he was also ex- c ceedingly surprised that, after making ? the remark, Mr Gould should have i put his tongue out very like a Maori i doing a haka. Mr Gould said he wished to apologise 1 most humbly. He had no intention j to be discourteous. In calling the £ Mayor my lord he had made a mistake. 1 The Mayor said he thought the depu- 1 tation should observe the ordinary i decencies of debate. Mr Gould: I have made my apology. ] The Mayor: Yes, and I accept it. j PUBLIC GATHERINGS. 1 1 Councillor Armstrong asked Mr . Machin if he thought the Square was a suitable place lor great gatherings where the people could manifest their sorrow or their joy. Mr Machin: It is the place where such gatherings will take place. Councillor P. W. Sharpe reminded Mr I-larper that the pioneers had laid out Victoria Square as a market place. He asked him if he thought the pioneers’ intentions should be carried out in regard to Cathedral Square and not in regard to Victoria Square. Mr Harper replied that it was quite, correct that originally Victoria Square

was laid out as Market Square; but subsequently an Act of Parliament had been passed authorising the erection of a town hall on part of Victoria Square, Councillor Sharpe: Supposing no Act of Parliament had been passed, would you be as eager to carry out the wishes of the pioneers in regard to Victoria Square as you are to carry out theii wishes in regard to Cathedral Square ? Mr Harper replied that the Act of Parliament took in part of the riverbank on the north side. The position was set out clearly in the Act. Councillor J. W. Roberts asked Mr I Machin if he was aware that there I were veiled conveniences in almost ! every public square in the world, j Mr Machin said he knew of no square in any part of the world with such an erection as was proposed to be put in Cathedral Square. The general tendency nowadays was tc remove conveniences to less prominent places. NO PROTESTS IN PAST. Councillor R. M. Macfarlane asked if there had been any protests made when the trams were first laid in the Square against the intentions of the early settlers. Mr Harper said when the tram shelter was erected he had advised the carriers that it was an illegal structure, but no steps were taken by the carriers or anyone else. It was not his business to do so. Councillor Macfarlane: There were no public protests? Mr Harper: Not that I knew of. Councillor Manning asked Mr Machin if he agreed that any future plans for the development of Christchurch should be decided according to the plans of the pioneers. Mr Machin: No.

Councillor • Manning: The point is then, Mr Machin, that you have just drawn this in to bolster up your case? Mr Machin: Oh, naturally. (LaughCouncillor Sullivan asked Mr Machin if he was aware that the pioneers had agreed to allow public buildings to be erected in the centre of the Square. Mr Machin: I should say that the history of the past seventy years showed that better counsels prevailed.

“SHUFFLING.” Councillor Sullivan: I submit that you are shuffling in the answer you have given. Mr Machin said that he preferred not to answer any more questions by Councilor Sullivan, because the latter had accused him of shuffling. Councillor Sullivan: A very wise course. The Mayor then questioned Mi Machin concerning statements in Sir Henry Wigram’s book on the History of Christchurch. Mr Machin said there was nothing irreconcilable in the desire to respect the wishes of the pioneers, and the fact that the original plans in regard to the Square had undergone changes. The Mayor then asked Mr Harper a number of questions concerning the early history of the Square, and Mr Harper remarked that it seemed very like an examination. “ Personally I would not like you to take that view.” the Mayor said. “I am very delighted to see j’ou here, but I just •wanted to try and show you that all these things indicate that the Parliament of the past must be controlled by the necessities of the present and the future.” Mr Harper agreed that that was so. NO ALTERNATIVE SUGGESTED. The Mayor said that the council would give very careful consideration to what had been said, but the fundamental and essential weakness of the deputation’s case was that it had not given the council a glimpse of an alternative. The council had a difficult problem to deal with and it was a pity the deputatiqn had. not placed something before it that could be consider ed as an alternative. As it was all that the council had before it was its own scheme. At the same time he wished to thank the deputation for expressing its views. After the deputation had withdrawn, Councillor F. R. Cooke inquired whether the engineer had been asked to report on the matter. The Mayor said he had asked the engineer to get tallies taken of the extent to. which the conveniences were used. One tally was taken last Tuesday, because of the large number of visitors in the city. The attendants stated that last Tuesday was less than the average as far as the women’s conveniences were concerned. Councillor Armstrong: The people were all out of town at the races,^ The Mayor: Do the people of Christchurch go to the races? A TALLY. Continuing, tfcie Mayor said that on Tuesday the men’s conveniences were used by 3573 and the women’s by S7B. On Saturday the women's conveniences were used by 1200. These figures showed clearly the need of these conveniences. Councillor Sullivan said that what interested him about the matter was the means adopted to coerce the minds ot the people to insure opposition to the council’s scheme for. the improvement of the conveniences in the Square. A prominent man who had been in favour of the scheme was now desperately opposed to it. It would be interesting to .ascertain what circumstances had induced this extraordinary change. He thought it was due to a sort of Germa,n frightfulness carried on in the columns of the newspapers. However, if the council could be turned from its purpose by this form of terrorism, he had judged the council wrongly. If it was the intention of the pioneers that the Square should be kept an open site, why did they not keep it such? The power was in their hands. Records in the possession of the City Council showed that representations were made by the Cathedral Commissioners or authorities of the time in favour of putting a road through the Square. It was obvious that the putting of roads through the Square was responsible for commercialising the Square. I.f it was the wish of ; the- pioneers that the Square should be kept a sacred and holy place, the gbvious thing to do was. not to put roads through it. Yet the pioneers had deliberately put the road through. The pioneers had opened the Square to traffic and also to public buildings. The pioneer councils, with the consent of the pioneer Cathedral Chapter, had gone so far as to agree to the erection of conveniences in the Cathedral grounds. Who had put the old steam trams in the Square? If it was not the pioneers, it was certainly the early colonists. He had searched the hies of the newspapers, and had found no reference to any protests when the trams, hotels or picture theatres were put into the Square. Neither had there been any protest when the present conveniences were put into the Square. The opposition had only arisen when the present Labour council came into office and took up the scheme that had been adopted by a previous council. All the evidence showed that the present opposition came from those who were opposed to the Labour council. By agreeing to a road through the Square and the erection of public and private buildings, the pioneers themselves had created the situation of to-day. It was too late to turn back the clock of progress. The Square must remain the civic centre of the city.

“ EXTRAORDINARY DEPUTATION/’ Councillor Cooke referred to the deputation as an extraordinary one. It was supposed to be composed of the intellectual and aesthetic people of the city, but amongst them they appeared to have as much hooliganism as some of the newspapers had credited to the Labour council. It was an extraordinary deputation to approach a civic body asking for a favour. Beyond referring to some of the deputation as hooligans, he would leave it at that. Councillor Cooke maintained that for years the Square had been used for utilitarian purposes. The Square had been found necessary to carry traffic from one end of the city to the other. If the opponents to the scheme took the matter to a Court of law, he was sure they would be non-suited. He was sure that by going ahead with the scheme they .would be doing the. right thing for the city. THE MARKET SUE. Councillor J. W. Bean land said lie was sorry that the debate had taken the course it had. While there had been discourtesy on the part of some of the members of the deputation he had hoped that the council would have been prepared to reconsider the matter instead of just standing pat on its previous decision. With a good deal of what had been said he disagreed entirely. About fourteen years ago he was one of a party which went round the Square looking for sites for conveniences and he had been of the opinion that the tram shelter could be done away w’ith. The present w r as a splendid opportunity for improving the Square instead of making it worse. He suggested that the council should place the women’s rest room on a part of the Municipal Market site and the men’s conveniences in a less conspicuous part of the Square than they were now. The problem could be overcome without a great deal of difficulty. He considered that the • trains had to go through the Square but the present shelter could lie removed and replac- , ed with a. couple of small shelters in . other places. Councillor G. Manning said .be could . have agreed- with a certain amount of what Councillor Beanland had said if i the deputation had put forward any L practical proposition. But all that the b deputation had done was to exploit the sanctity of the wishes of the early pio- ; neers. It had not said anything to - cause him to change his opinion. After criticising the policy of the newspap-

ers Councillor Mantling referred to the initiation of the present scheme. He declared that the opposition to the scheme had been worked up by the newspapers only since the Labour Council had been elected. POLL ASKED FOR. Councillor A. W. Beaven said there were several essential differences between what the previous councils had proposed and what the present council proposed. The original proposal was to construct a colonnade right round the Godley plot, but the present scheme provided that only half of the colonnade should be erected. The last council also intended that the matter should go to a poll of the ratepayers. The Mayor and several Labour councillors: No, never. Councillor Beaven repeated that that was the intention of the previous council. The Mayor: Councillor Beaven has a perfect right to his opinion, but he has not a right to misrepresent the facts. The facts are that the previous council got permission from the Board of Health to raise the jnoney without the authority of tha ratepayers. Councillor Beaven: They had permission to raise a certain sum, but not the whole £9OOO. I believe I am correctly stating the opinion of the last council in saying that if permission had not been obtained for the full amount the matter would have been submitted to the ratepayers. Councillor Beaven challenged the Mayor to submit the matter to a vote of the ratepayers. He considered that the council should respect the sentiments of the old pioneers. The council had no right to force the scheme on the citizens without a vote of the ratepayers and he wished to move that the scheme be not gone on with until a poll was taken. The Mayor said that Councillor Beaven was quite out of order. The only way he could move a resolution of that sort was by notice of motion. If he wished to test the feeling of the council his remedy was by notice of motion. Councillor Beaven: I will willingly give notice to that effect. “ CHANGED HIS MIND.” Councillor H. T. Armstrong, M.P., said that .the previous council never had any intention of submitting the matter to a poll of the ratepayers and Councillor Beaven knew that perfectly well. Councillor Beaven’s friends had told him that he had to his mind and. like a newspaper editor he had to do it. Councillor Beaven: I’ve already stated that I’m in favour of the tram shelter. Councillor Armstrong: 'You’ve changed your mind again. There was no alteration in the scheme, he added, except in regard to details. It had no right to be regarded as a party' question aqd the Labour members of the t council had not made it one.. But the Health Officer had favoured it under the old council And opposed it under the present council. He woqld go s,o far as to say that the conveniences would have been completed according to plan and with the approval of the Board of Health and with no opposition from Mr Gould if it had not been for the change in the council. The deputation said that, the trams should not be in the Square, but that they were there and that the shelter should not be there, but it was there. The council had either to tolerate the present abomination or put something better in its place. A poll would cost about £7OO and would only give the opinion of the ratepayers'; It was not a matter that should be submitted to the ratepayers as it did not involve a tax on the rates, and if it was put. to a vote at all it should be a vote of all the citizens. If Mr Gould was willing to provide the money for taking such a vote the matter might be considered. "A SORT OF GRAVEYARD.” Councillor C. L. Carr said that the idea of the scheme was to provide facilities for the people who inevitably assembled in Cathedral Square. To say that the building was a veiled convenience was a misuse of terms. The coun-cil-proposed to establish a place where people could rest and where they could leave parcels. Incidentally' conveniences would be provided. Apparently Mr Gould wanted to turn the Square into a sort of graveyard with memorial columns and statues. With all due respect to the people who had formed the deputation that evening he maintained that they did not represent the working people of the city. At this stage the Mayor said he thought the council had discussed the matter sufficiently. He thought they should go ahead with their scheme. Councillor G. R. Hunter asked what was the position with regard to Councillor Beaven's notice of motion. The Mayor said he was doubtful whether, under the rules of the council, Councillor Beaven could move his notice of motion within six months because already the matter had been decided twice by the council. In any case he did not think Councillor Beaven’s notice of* motion would alter the decision of the council. The discussion was then dropped and the council went into committee to deal with other business.