SEVERANCE OF MOUNT HUTT ROAD BOARD.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXXI, Issue 8443, 10 August 1911, Page 6

SEVERANCE OF MOUNT HUTT ROAD BOARD.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —At the meeting of ratepayers held at Methven: on August 3rd,' Mr Friedlanders one argument seemed to be pages and pages of> figures. The whole of his cry was—" Now give me

your figures." In this he seems to have entirely missed our chief point. Although figures do come in to a large extent, they are far from being our main desire for severance.: What we aim at is self-administration, in order to have something to show for the rates we pay. But there can be little doubt left in the minds of the Mount Hutt ratepayers, now, that figures do come into the matter, even to a greater extent than we make them, or why this bitter opposition. Mr Studholme is reported to have said at Rakaia that the whole tendency of the age is not severance but amalgamation. In this I do not think he is consistent to himself or his politics. I maintain that the whole flow of the tide is for closer settlement and concentrated control. As time rolls on, and at probably no far distant date, the Mount Hutt County Council (or as I hope it will be styled in the future the Methven County Council) will have to submit to the same treatment that it is dealing out to its parent Council, and have its Borough Council, and its county cut into, at least, ridings.

Does Mr Studholme wish to tell us that he is; genuinely of the opinion that it is possible for nine separate owners of nine farms (I am taking one farm to represent each Road Board in the AsMnirton County Council) to appoint a chairman (or general manager) with a casting vote, meet once a month for a few hours and have one common banking account with a limited amount of capital?. Does .he wish us to think, or can lie think for one minute that such' an arrangement could work ? No! he knows as well, perhaps better, than I do that such an arrangement could end only in muddle, and starvation for some of the farms. Each owner (or overseer, as he would have to become) would want as much money as he could lay his hands on, for necessary work on his particular farm, while the general manager would say: " No! none of you can have any money this'month. I must make my beautiful home more attractive still. It is to our common interest." Mr. Studholme and the Ashburton County Council, to be'consistent, should be advocating the amalgamation of alt the Counties in Canter Iniiy, meeting once a month (say) at Christeh'urch, each sending in two representatives, doingv.away with their Council and staff. How does my suggestion strike them? The only fault I have to find with it is that it takes us back to bygone ages —one can almost hear the rumble of the bullock drays in the streets. I* do not think that any of the ratepayers of this district have any quarrel with the members of the Ashburton County Council. I myself would be glad to see the same men on our new Council, did they but live here and had they no other conflicting interest. : I do not seek office myself: the life I have chosen keeps me fully occupied and, moreover, I have every confidence in tiie present Board. DONALD W. McLEAN." Mount Butt, Methven. . . August 7, 1911. . -