The Daily Telegraph THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 1881.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 2974, 6 January 1881, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph THURSDAY, JANUARY 6, 1881.

A stranger reading the published reports of the two last meetings of the Municipal Council might well be excused for thinking that the office of borough engineer should in all cases be conferred on " a friend of the family." We have heard so much of the duty of bestowing the office upon a local man, and we have heard so little of the desirability of securing the services of the most capable person procurable, that we even find ourselves unconsciously giving way occasionally to the idea that professional skill and experience are of less importance than the gift of the post to a fellow-townßman. It is, however, actually the case, that the respective merits of the twenty-six applicants for the office have been lost sight of in the unseemly struggle that has occurred between the Works Committee and the Council. It is no longer a question of men so much as of the principle involved in the right of the Council to decline to accept the recommendations of the Committee. The " local man " was an after-thought, and was a cry got np to enlist sympathy on behalf ot those members of the committee who think that that body, however poorly represented it

may be, has the right to rule the Council. So far as we know, none of the Councillors have any prejudices in favor of one candidate over another. If Mr Marchant bad been selected by a minority of the Council in Works Committee assembled, we should have seen precisely the same struggle over the claims of somebody else, with this difference, that the parties would have been reversed. Unfortunately, party feeling has become too strong for Councillors to argue the question out with moderation. The scene in the Council last night, though highly diverting as a mere spectacle, was not creditable to a body to which the ratepayers look for the calm deliberation of public affairs. Whether rightly or mistakenly it has been decided by both parties that an engineer's services are required by the borough, and it is the duty of the Council to secure the best that can be obtained. The question of economy—the salary having been fixed —should not now enter into the discussion. Perhaps the best economy could be shown in giving a handsome salary to a really first-class man. A little carelessness in drawing out a specification, or a little want of forethought in the design of a street gutter, may coat the borough a great deal more than the employment of two engineers at £300 a year each. Cr. McKay bases his action in the matter of the appointment of an engineer on the ground of economy—not the economy which the ratepayers have the right to expect, but an economy that aims at saving a bawbee at tho risk of losing a thousand pounds. If we understand his action rightly, he would rescind the appointment of Mr Marchant, and confer it at once upon a gentleman who would undertake its duties for half the salary. He would not, we apprehend, advise the invitation of fresh applications for the post at a salary of £150 with right of private practice. If fresh applications were invited with these altered conditions there would be less objection to the attempt now being made to defeat the resolution of the Council. But nothing of this sort has been mentioned. As we said before, the " local man" and economy cry was subsequently adopted by the minority to gain sympathy and support from outside the Council. As the case stands now, Mr Marchant is undoubtedly the Municipal Engineer for this Borough, and the non-recognition of his appointment by the minority in the Council, aided by the Mayor, does not cancel the appointment, nor prevent bim claiming the emoluments of his office. In the meantime the borough, while being liable for the payment, loses the services of its engineer, at a time, too, when a costly contract has just been let which demands professional superintendence.