The Daily Telegraph WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1882.

Daily Telegraph (Napier), Issue 3508, 4 October 1882, Page 2

The Daily Telegraph WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 4, 1882.

Amongst the recommendations to be submitted by the Public Works Committee to the Council this evening is one for the appointment of a sub-committee to consider the advisability or otherwise of adopting the new Rating Act. As far as we know at present there is not a copy of the measure as it passed its final stages to be obtained in the town. This fact is, however, of minor importance as regards the appointment of the sub-committee, as it is but a question of a few days when the statutes ot the laet session will be obtainable. There are numerous copies of the Bill as it was presented to Parliament, and from its reception in both Houses we do not think any very material amendments were made to it with respect to those portions bearing immediately on the valuation and rating of districts under the administration of local bodies. Prior to drafting the Bill the Government consulted the local bodies on the general question of rating and valuation, and, in addition, invited and received suggestions from gentlemen thoroughly acquainted with the whole subject. From Major Atkinson's speech on moving the second reading of the Bill, we learn that those suggestions _ have been as far aa possible embodied in the measure. He also stated that, of the 202 replies which the Government received from local bodies, there were 123 of full approval, 60 of partial approval,

and only 19 of disapproval, on the general principle of the Bill. From the North Island there were 79 and from the South 44 approvals; from the North 45 and from the South Island 15 partial approvals ; the South Island sent 16 and the North Island 3 disapprovals. It will thus be seen that upon tbe general principle of the measure there were large majorities in its favor. The Act, we are assured, contains very valuable provisions for the recovery of rates, and the levying of special and general rates, and these, of course, will necessarily be availed of by local bodies, as the Act in these respects repeals the existing Rating Act. It is only with regard to the adoption of the property tax valuation as the beet valuation that the Act is optional, and it is to ascertain whether the adoption of that valuation would or would not be advisable that a sub-commiitee is recommended to be appointed. Under any circumstances the new Act compels future valuations to be made on the capital instead of the annual values, and the only question to be decided by the sub-committtee will be whether it would not be as well to adopt the property tax valuation, or to have an independent valuation made by a local officer. Our own opinion is that the difference between the two valuations would be extremely trifling, and, therefore, that the cost of an independent valuation might as well be saved. Tbere ia this point, however, to be considered, and that is that the property tax valuation is only made once in three years; in a borough the constant changes in ownership and occupancy of properties would necessarily entail annual amendments, and it may be thought the cost of discovering these needed amendments might be equal to a general valuation. This is, however, one of those points to which the attention of the sub-committee would be specially directed, nor has it, indeed, been overlooked in the Act, but upon this we cannot speak with certainty until a copy of the statute has been received. This mnch is certain, that the average annual valuation of this borough costs about £150, whereas, by the adoption of the property tax valuation, the valuation would be supplied to the Corporation at the rate of £1 for every 100 names on the burgess list. Tbe are under 1000 names on the burgess list of Napier, so that the property tax valuation would only cost the borough about £10, thus effecting a saving of somethig like £140. We cannot help thinking that whatever alterations might be needed in tbe valuation in the intervals of the property tax valuation would not cost very much, and that the adoption of the Rating Act in its entirety would be tbe most econoaiical course for tbe Corporation to pursue.