The Press. TUESDAY, JUNE 12, 1894. AN EPIDEMIC OF DISINTEGRATION.

Press, Volume LI, Issue 8817, 12 June 1894, Page 4

The Press. TUESDAY, JU NE 12, 1894. AN EPIDEMIC OF DISINTEGRATION.

Just at present there seems to be a mauia for constituting email boroughs round about Christchurch. Tbe inhabitants of New Brighton, or sonic of them, want to have a borough there, and if they succeed will cripple seriously the Avon and the Heathcote Road Boards. Addiugton is seeking to be made one mainly we fancy in order to gen rid of the saleyards. We hear also that there is a movement in Opawa to constitute still another in that district. We are nob going to argue for or against) eitber of these proposed boroughs. We do not at present know enough of the circumstances. But we do say that it in very deplorable that there should be this tendency to disintegrate, aud to create more local bodies. It leads to a sad waste of the ratepayers' money. It is deeply to be regretted that the Chrietchurcbi district is already aplit up iuto three boroughs. There ie really no reason why Christchurcb, Sydenham, and St. Albans should not have been and be one municipality. It is only because there are interested officials and dignitaries, soma of whose occupation would be gone, that there ia much opposition to an amalgamation. The boroughs could easily be amalgamated ou term 3 by which tbe respective burdens of the ratepayers in the different separate districts would not be increased when amalgamated, and it could easily be arranged that the rates raised in each district should be spent there. But of .course there would be only one Council and one set of officers for the amalgamated borough. •'Consequently the Councillors and Officers are bitterly oppoeed to amalgamation, and the public interest has to suffer, as is so often the case, because of the private interests of individuals. But though Tested interests will probably for mauy a long day prevent'amalgamation of existing boroughs, there are as yet no vested interests which need be considered when we are asked to constitute one. Onr various locai government Acts provide too eimple a machinery for the constitution of new districts and bodies. All that ia required is a petition to tbe Governor, signed by a sufficient number of ratepayers, aud the thing is done, unless somebody opposed to the project will take the trouble to get up a petition to the contrary effect, signed by a a greater number of ratepayers. Everybody k%owa how easy it is to get people to aiga petitions. As long a3 they do not involve the person signing in any personal expenditure most people as a rule will sign anything they are much pressed to sigu. Moreover, in getting signatures to petitions, a great deal of ' misrepresentation is often made use of by the canvassers. The people who want something done having some end to serve are more likely to take some trouble to get it done than the people ! who object to it on public grounds are likely to take in objecting. Consequently an opposing petition is often not> presented, simply because while ' many dislike the proposal no one takes enough trouble to substantiate the 'objection. Of course there is possibly uouae discretion le£c in the Government

as to the granting of the petition. Bat even if so, that does nob help matters. The Government—we are not speaking of this present Government but of all Governments—under our present system of course think of nothing but their own comfort. I! the granting of the prayer or the petition will please some member who is of their party, and gives them his support, then the Government will facilitate the granting of the petition, It would be far better if in every case when there is a proposal to alter the boundaries of a local governing district or to constitute a new body or district, it could be referred for inquiry to some independent authority or tribunal. We do not think it ia satisfactory in any sense to throw the duty upon the Government. It ia unfair to them. It ia unfair also to tbe member of Parliament for the district, for it casts upon him the duty of taking part in a dispute —of taking a side in fact—and of course members of Parliament like Mr. Pickwick think it right always to shout with tbe largest mob. In England there is a body called the Local Government Board, which conduces inquiries of this sort, and indeed in many other ways controls and supervises the actions cf local bodies. But it is not expedient to create a new set of officials or a new body for this purpose. Such inquiries had better be conducted either by Stipendiary Magistrates or by Judges of the Supreme Court. Parliament; should of course by statute fix the principles which are to govern the consideration of proposals for the constitution of new districts, and that being done there is no reason, constitutional or otherwise, why judicial officers should not hear evidence and form conclusions on such questions any more than on any other questions of fact. The Magistrates have as a rule enough to do and their salaries are not fixed by statute, and they hold their offices at the pleasure of the Government. These are reasons again&t their dealing with such questions. But then they are On the spot, and are nob troubled with so much dignity as Supreme Court Judges. The Supreme Court Judges are not over-burdened with work, and have plenty of time to undertake new functions, though they always object very strongly to any increase of their duties. Bat they are, with all their faults, superior men to the ordinary run of Magistrates, and their decision would carry more respect. We should, therefore, prefer that this duty was cast upon them. We do not say that an inquiry need be held in every case. It need only be held when a certain number of ratepayers move in the matter—say half a dozen or a dozen. If there is any serious objection to a proposal for altering boundaries or constituting new districts, there could always without any difficulty be found a dozen ratepayers wbo would be prepared to move the Supreme Court in the matter. At such an inquiry oral evidence on oath would be taken, which, we used hardly say, is far more trustworthy than miles of signatures to petitions. This question of the constant alteration of boundaries is a more serious one than most people think. It is one of ihe great vices of our present representative system, that every few years alterations are made in the boundaries of our Parliamentary electoral districts. This renders it difficult for public feeling to form and connect itself with a district. People never know who may be their electoral colleagues at next election. In fact people are often quite at a loss to know ia what district they are. In perhaps a lesser degree a similar kind of mischief is worked by constant alteration of local government areas. Of course in a yoUus; country like this it is impossible for boundaries and districts and systems to be fixed which shall endure for all time. But there is a happy medium which might be hit, and the present legislative provisions which practically enable any small eection of ratepayers who fancy they hare a small grievance against their local government to split off and form a new local governing community, with a new set of officers, office books, aud all the paraphernalia of Government, are not conducive to the well-being of the commuuity. fairly large districts whoae revenues are large enough to enable them co employ good officers and whose functions will be of sufficient im portance to induce men of ability to seek a place on the governing body are much more to be desired than email districts with inadequately paid officers and village wiseacres at the Council Board. The waste of money by the latter system is very considerable, though this is not the only evil. We should imagine that if the Chrieochurch boroughs were amalgamated, and eomejof the suburban districts included, there would be a saving in ad' ministration of something like £2000 a year, which would enable an appreciable sum to be taken off the rates, or if thought better to be spent, would enable ail sorts of useful works to be undertaken, which at present must remain dreams of the distant future.