The Star. WEDNESDAY, 4th AUGUST, 1880. THE RIGHT OF PUBLIC TENDER.

Hawera & Normanby Star, Volume I, Issue 33, 4 August 1880, Page 2

The Star. WEDNESDAY, 4th AUGUST, 1880.

THE RIGHT OF PUBLIC TENDER.

One of the greatest safeguards for the honest working of our municipal institutions is the right of public tender, and we think there are few British-born subjects who will be found to deny that such is the fact. Reporting the proceedings of local bodies has, of course, a tendency to put a stop to anything like what the Americans have so aptly termed log-rolling ; but no greater safeguard can be had against that evil practice than the right of public tender for anything over a very small amount. So far as we have seen, the Road Board has laid down that as a guiding principle. The wardens of each locality are empowered to spend £2, but for anything beyond that they have to get the authority of the Board, which, as a rule, means calling for tenders. We regret to see that the Town Board has not followed the same example. There was considerable discussion on Monday night, at the meeting of that body, when the accounts of Messrs. McDevitt, and Dingle and Newsham, were laid before the Board. On the sth of April, a resolution was passed by the Board to the following effect: — " That, in the event of Mr. McDevitt not carting the gravel required for the footpath, as per agreement, tenders be called for the same." From the statements made on Monday night by Messrs. King and Cockburn, we gather that the amount agreed to be paid to Mr. McDevitt was at the rate of 6a. 6d. pev yard, and his account was only passed for payment on that basis of calculation. Mr. Stevenson stated that the working committee were only empowered by the Board to give a similar amount ; yet, in the face of those instructions — if they were given, which we have no reason to doubt from what transpired — an agreement was entered into for the supply of the gravel required at the rate of 8s per yard, and Messrs. Dingle and Newsham's account was passed for paymen for the full amount. We do not for one moment say that Bs. was too much, or that 6s. 6d. was too little. We can give no opinion one way or the other, nor is at all necessary to do so. The working committee, it is very clear, exceeded the limits assigned to them by the Board, although they may have done so with the best intentions in the world. But the members of the Board, as a whole, are not blameless, because they had no business to delegate such important powers to tbeir working committee. Even if the gravel could have been got at 28. 6d. per yard, instead of 6s. 6d., or Bs., that does not alter the fact that the system is a vicious one, and the sooner a distinct by-law is framed to prevent a similar recurrence the better. The Board are guardians of the public purse, and the public have a right to tender for anything beyond a very small amount. It is for this right that we contend, and we shall continue to do so in the mii terests of the public.