, 1913-01-29

Interpretation were, that a burgher in Fred
eriksted requested to have his gallery plat
form before 3 rooms raised.
About 3 months before the arrival of the
new Building Inspector the matter was Ind
before the former Building Inspector. who
thought it better to lay it before his success
sor, yet the person in question got his verbal
consent and commenced the work. but ms
the work went on, it was discovered, that
there was q Misunderstanding, and that the
Building Inspector only had meant, that
three steps should be made.
He then applied to the new Building In
spector, who even took photos of the place,
but got q refusal.
He had before applied to the Street Com
mission, whose Chairman was the actg.
Policemaster and his application had been
recommended; be now again applied to the
Street Commission, whose Chairman is the
present Policemaster, and again obtained q
recommendation.
The gallery has been there for 9 years
and been very little used BY the Public. be-
cause it is drawn in from the street and the
Building is situated between two other
buildings close up to it.
The majority IN Frederiksted finds that
rebuilding will embelish the house. The
work has now been suspended and the whole
d"OoOAOh 10 "a 6AOob ~ OGuGI pro
perry owners.
The Speaker hoped that Government
would be willing to take up the matter again
for reconsideration.
His EcceNency answered, that he would
take up the wording of the Interpolation
aud read it, and continued, that it would be
q rather unusual step from Governments
side to take up q matter again, which had
been decided by Government and not by
the Building Inspector, without new matters
ia the case had been laid before Govern
ment.
The reason for the refusal was, that, by
raising the gallery, the Public was deprived
of its right to use the gallery and Govern
ment did not consider it right to dispense
from this rule to deprive the Public of any
thing in favour of Il private party.
His Excellency knew very we'll, that in
former years sdch permission hud been
given, but he considered it wrong and would
stick to the principle.
lst Member for FredeIik4ted Town (CoM-
ter) remarked, that the Building Inspector
had not been quite right in stating the Pub
lic,. The gallery had never been used by
the Public, as he had mentioned, the house
was sit lated between two other buildings
in o manner, that no one from the street
would take the trouble to walk in a circular
Ii feet III from the street and then out
q rain. The property owner proposed to
raise the gallery 4 feet with 3 steps at both
ends and leave the gallery open. 1t was no
intruding on Public ground. The Speaker
hoped, that Government would look at the
matter from a practical point.
HIS ErceAe1cy answered, that it means
using public road, aud if u man commences
building before he has got sanction from the
proper authorities, he must take the conse-
quences. His Excellency repeated, that he
considered it wrong, that permission had
been given in former days, Government
should not be allowed to dispense from the
Public's use of sidewalks. He considered
it right to stick to this principle.
The Chairman said he was sorry that his
Excellency had decided the question in con-
sequence of his personal principles. If ques-
tions should be decided according to each
Govern RS personal principles there would
arise great uncertainties q, to decisions in pub
lie affairs, The Speaker should consider that
the principles of the Government as such
should be followed and as former Governors
have granted similar permissions as that
asked for, he considers the individual ought
to have been given the permission; in fact
every individual should be ~cOmmOda