Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout559"The Evening Telegram , Toronto, FRIDAY, JUNE 16, 1922 WILL FIGHT FOR RIGHTS TO USE FRENCHMAN'S BAY City to Co-operate With Ontario County in Endeavor to Have Government Regain Control IS NOW PRIVATE PROPERTY Fee Charged for Camping on Beach-—Residents Resent Restrictions— Many Torontonians Affected The popular rendezvous for summer mariners and lake shore campers, Fairport, better known as Frenchman's Bay, and noted for its spacious sandbars, good fishing and bathing, where for many , years campers have enjoyed the free privileges of the property and accepted the hospitality of the residents, has passed into the hands of private ownership. It now displays a number of signs proclaiming that it is private property, much to the disgust of the local residents. They offer various opinions as to what should, could and might be done to bring about the happy conditions of the past, when all dwelt in harmony, in an atmosphere of peace. BEACH PRIVILEGES GONE. ""There is not a doubt in the world but what the Federal Government have released all claim on Frenchman's Bay and given a clear title, not only for the bay itself, but the adjoining sandbars, to the Pickering Harbor , Company,"" said Fred Richardson, warden of Ontario County, to The Telegram. ""With the title go the privileges of the people who have previously enjoyed the use of the waters and the beach. ""How a member of the Dominion Parliament, could sanction such a thing is beyond comprehension, and it is our intention to have the matter fully investigated,"" continued Mr. Richardson. The fact that the, bay and sandbars were private property has recently, become known to the residents of the district, and on the sandbars, which are well known to many, Torontonians, are posted signs ' bearing the words, ""Private property, for camping permits apply at hotel."" The hotel mentioned is the property of E. M. Croker., Reeve of Scarboro Township, who has leased- the bay and adjoining beaches, and, therefore, has the right to determine who may and may not use the property. CAMPING FEES. It is understood that permits will be granted to campers at the price of one dollar per week and eight dollars for the season, whereas, previously, no charge was made. James Hedley, who has been a resident of the district for over 40 years rented boats on the bay, stat-years, rented boats on the bay, stated that Mr. Croker had spoken of bidden the use of the sandbar unless we pay a fee."" SQUATTERS' RIGHTS. It is stated that the deed given for the property dates back to the days of squatters' rights, and one resident was given $100 to relinquish his claim to the property. He accepted the sum, but openly acknowledged that he was not aware that he had had any claim on the property. Reeve Croker, lessee of the property, stated that he has no intention of charging a fee for the boating privileges on the bay, but stated that a charge would be made for camping privileges on the sandbars for the reason of conducting the place properly and with a view to reserving the right to keep away any person not conducting themselves in a proper manner. ""The place has never been properly supervised,"" said Mr. Croker, ""and my only desire is to keep down any rough element for the protection of my own interests and of my property."" SOLD BY GOVERNMENT According to Mr. Croker, the sand-bar and bay were advertised for sale and sold by the Government to the present owners about five years ago, and as lessee he has the right to determine who shall be allowed to use the property. It has been announced that the solicitors of the city of Toronto and Ontario county will co-operate in determining on a course of legal action in the matter of bringing the harbor once more under Government control. The complaint made is not against any action taken by the owner to place restrictions on the place,'but the possibility of what may occur if the bay remains in the hands of private owners. LETTER TO MAYOR. The following letter has been sent to Mayor Maguire by Reeve Croker: ""Mayor Maguire, Toronto. "" ""Dear Sir,—I noticed an article in The Telegram headed 'Frenchman's Bay Sold.' The Reeve of Pickering states that people are charged for boating privileges on , the bay, which is false and without foundation, as I am lessee of the place named. No one has ever been charged for boating, nor can I see why the City of Toronto can take up a case 20 miles east of the city. I might state that I was surprised to see your name mixed in this false statement; Kindly have the statement made right and oblige. Yours truly, E. M. CROKER. ""Reeve, Scarboro Township,"" 'The Board of Control decided to co-operate with Warden Richardson, of Ontario County, after it had been pointed out that about 100 Toronto people had summer homes at the bay. Mayor Maguire described the situa-tion as an unwarranted sacrifice of Hon. John Hilliard, by an Act of the Provincial Government, and by an Act of the Dominion Government an agreement between Hon. John Hilliard Cameron and others was confirmed and the name of the company changed to the Pickering Harbor Co., Ltd.,. and all powers of the old company were vested in the new. PAID $25 PER ACRE In 1914 the Pickering harbor. Co., Ltd., made application to he Minister of Lands, . Forests and Mines for a patent to certain water lots, and two patents were issued, one for 59 acres, which, roughly speaking, comprises he western portion of the Bay; another for 87 acres, which includes sandbars and extends some distance into the lake along practically the whole water front adjoining the bay. The consideration in both these sales was $25 per acre. In the application for the patents, which is signed by A. E. Osler, president of the company, it states, that it is the intention of, the company to extend the wharves and piers from a distance of 650 feet to 1,000 feet from the shore, it also stated that, for many years the company had maintained wharves and elevators, and that large sums of money had been spent on harbor improvements, and that the company were prepared to make large expenditures with a view to enlarging the basin of the harbor. DID NOT KEEP PROMISE. Residents contend that the company have not carried on active operation for a great many years, and since the granting of these patents, not, one dollar has been expended in harbor improvements, on the contrary it is said, that the company permitted operations to be carried on which are destroying the harbor, and are diametrically opposed both to the objects of the company and the allegations contained in their petition for the patent. Mr. Burton states that he has….. "