The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1881.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3088, 20 May 1881, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph. FRIDAY, MAY 20, 1881.

It was satisfactory to learn at the Borough Council meeting from no less an authority than Cr. Swan that when the drainage works are completed there will be plenty of money left out of the loan to supply the hills with water. Cr. Swan has evidently taken a new departure. Hitherto we have always understood from him that, as the cost of the drainage works could not be fully estimated until they were completed, it i would be waßte of time to enter upon the question of an extended water supply. In a letter addressed to the Daily Telegraph on the 7th of this month, Mr Swan, in reference to supplying the hills with water, reporting his words in the Council, eaid, "I considered it a waste of valuable time at the present to go into that matter, as nothing could be done to further the object in view until the present drainage works were completed. . . The fact is there are three or four contracts yet to be undertaken, for which neither plans nor specifications are in hf»nd." Now, it stands to reason that if neither plans nor specifications are in hand no estimate can be given as to the probable cost of the 2ontracts yet to be undertaken, and thaf, therefore, Mr Swan can be only makiug a wild guess when he pays that there will be plenty of money for the water supply when the drainage works are completed. Our opinion is that there will not be plenty of money, and that it is not altogether intended that there shall be plenty of money for any other purposes than drainage. It is a curious circumstance that whenever a discussion arises as to whether it is lawful to spend any part of the loan on water-supply extension, Cr. Swan has been foremost in declaring that such a course would be impossible, because utterly illegal. We are perforce compelled to bow to his superior knowledge on this subject, supported as it is by the opinion of the municipal solicitor, but our object in writing is to suggest a method of getting bold of a portion of the loan before it is all wasted for the extension of the watersupply. We believe that it is not unknown to the financial administration of the affairs of this borough for loans to be borrowed out of one account to balance some other account in the bank. Whether this practice is legal or not we do not profess to know, but when it has been objected to this method of financing has been vindicated on the ground that it is done elsewhere, notably at Auckland. What we propose tben is this, that the Corporation " borrow" a sura of say £15,000 from the loan account, and that thia money be spent in supplying the hills with water. If there should be £15,000 left after the completion of the drainage works repayment to the loan account would not be necessary. On the other hand, should it be feared that there would be a deficiency, a provision fund might be created by increasing the water coneumers' rate. By the Municipal Corporations Act we find that the following rates can be charged: — Upon all buildings of the rateable value of £12 10s a rate not exceeding 10s per annum ; exceeding £12 10s, but not exceeding £100, a rate not exceeding seven per cent, on such value ; exceeding £100, but not exceeding £200, a rate not exceeding six per cent.; exceeding £200, but not exceeding £300, a rate not exceeding five per cent.; exceeding £300, a rate not exceeding four per cent, on such value. This scale of rates is far higher than that of this borough, and when it is considered that the existing scale barely produces a revenue to cover the actual cost of supplying the water to consumers, without reckoning interest on the waterworks loan, the advisability of increasing the scale cannot be doubted. It may not be out of place to point out here the absurdity of the present scale. Houses, supplied' with water, of a rateable value not exceeding £12 10s, are charged the maximum rate allowed by law, namely ten shillings, but premises of a rateable value exceeding £12 10s., but not exceeding £100, are only charged 2£ per cent, or 4£ per cent less than what the law permits. Thus a house of the valuation of £12 10s. ia charged ten shillings, while another house valued on the roll at £15 has only to pay 7s 6d ! Again a house of the value of £175 has to pay 2J per cent., or £4 7s 6d., while another house of the value of £200 is only charged 1£ per cent., or £3! No defence can be offered for such a - monstrously absurd seale —a scale that has been drawn up, apparently, for no other purpose than to favor the rich man at the expense of the poor ratepayer. To revert back to our suggestion. The revenue derived from the water consumers' rate was last year £533, a sum insufficient to pay maintenance, salaries of engine driver aad turncock, and provide fuel, &c. It is calculated that this year the revenue will just about cover those charges, but no attempt has been made to make the consumers' rates go towards paying any portion of the 6 per cent, interest on the original loan of £10,000 borrowed for a water supply. Our proposal then is—the borrowing would only be a fiction—to borrow the amount required from the drainage loan, to be expended in extending the waterworks, and to charge throughout the borough such a scale of water consumers rates allowed by law, until the drainage works are finished, by which time it would be ascertained whether there is any truth in Cr. Swan's statement that, when these latter are completed, there will be plenty of money left for supplying the hills with water.