The Lyttelton Times.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VIII, Issue 493, 25 July 1857, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times.

Saturday, July 25.

The agreement made between the Provincial Government and Messrs. Miles, Kin<?tonfc Co. for the establishment of a local steam service has natui ally been the subject of much comment by the public"; arid we have willingly given publicity to letters which argue both sides of ihe question. That question is, whether or no the terms of the agreement are beneficial to the public ; and, as a consequence, since the Govern! ment asks support in that scheme from the public, whether or no that support ou»-ht to be accorded. °

The support asked for is pecuniary ; and there is something out of the eorrmon about it. The process adopted in the present case by the Government for raising money from the people is the most remote possible from taxation. There is no kind of enforcement about it; not even the power of the largest possible majority in the smallest possible body of householders, in meeting assembled, is brought to bear upon a recusant contributor. Of the probable prosperity and advantages of the proposal each individual for himself is judge ; he may decline to be convinced by arguments ; he may refuse to bear his share in the public undertaking ; lie may not contribute if so he chooses. Acting upon this principle, which was i-üb-mitted to and confirmed by the Provincial Council, the Government, instead of using the power of the law makes a request for assistance, and explains fully the terms of the agreement it has made with the contractors. The public considers the appeal, and arguments pro and con find expression in the columns of the newspaper It is a novelty in state-craft to leave each individual of the public to choose whether he will contribute to the exigencies of the state or not. The only appearance of penalty for refusal seems to be conveyed in a threat that to non-contributors there -shall be no advantages given. Local self-government, with the system of rewards and punishments attached, is in this instance reduced < to its-lowest elements.

The public desires steamers for the coasting trade of the province. This desire has been often expressed, and attempts have been made before now to satisfy it. For such a service money is wanted, and" under our peculiar circumstances, in three' ways :—First, to start it; second, to meet the estimated loss of working it; and third, to guarantee it against the risks of loss or injury to which it is liable. In ths case before us, two of these three requisites are already provided. It is estimated that the expenses of working will not be repaid within the amount of £1,000 a year The government engages to provide for this deficiency, and a merchant is found w ~

will embark his capital in the enterprise, trusting to make it pay sufficient interest. But there is one thing still to be done, which is, to insure the capital thus embarked against risk of loss by accident; for to such risks a merchant's capital should never be exposed. To the body of the public, accordingly, for whose advantage and at whose desire the steamers are to be established, the Government and the contractors look to bear this third portion of the burden. Relieved of the trouble of management, secure from loss through any deficiency of .trade, and not having to lay down capital on which any certain return by way of interest could not be calculated, the public takes that share of transaction which is taken as a distinct business in JSngland by the underwriters at Lloyds. That the public should do it here does not alter the nature of the transaction, but is simply due to the fact that, being more deeply interested in the success of the undertaking, and being better acquainted with the nature of the risks, our own settlers are in a position to insure on more favourable terms'than any Company at a distance, t ignorant and careless as they would be of the circumstances of the case. I

It is well left to a mercantile community to argue the matter pro and con ; but arguments involving technical terms are puzzling to the public, and of this nature is the objection raised by some of our correspondents on account of the liability to 'general average.' The principle of ' averages' is simple enough, and consists in the understanding that the owners of vessel and cargo insure, one another; that is, if in avoiding loss to the whole a part is sacrificed, the remainder contribute to make good the loss of that part: a 'general average ' of contribution is struck, and the owner of the goods sacrificed receives the amount of his loss, less his own contribution, j Underwriters, take the place, of owners, and it will be seen at. once how the loss or damage to a vessel is lightened to her insurers by the circumstance of her carrying cargo. Should the ship strike and it be found necessary to use appliances to get her off, * general average ' compels the cargo which is preserved to pay a share of the expenses ; and the underwriters only pay their contribution 'averaged' according to the comparative values of the ship and cargo. And soSvith any other accident happening to the ship, or expense incurred in the preservation of'herself and cargo. Again, in the case of what is called jettison, when a portion of the cargo is destroyed to preserve the vessel from loss, the remainder of the cargo contributes with the ship to make good the part destroyed. So that the owners or underwriters of the vessel are not only soured from the total loss of their

property by incurring a smaller loss, but even ibis loss is-shared by others. We have thought it desirable to explain the meaning of this phrase, because it might be imagined to mean the imposition of an additional burden upon insurers, whereas it is rather the contrary. The' principle of the matter we have "pointed out, and; intricate as the settlement of an ' average ' question may sometimes be in practice, the thepry is simple enough. Perhaps consideration may show that the premium offered by the" Government is sufficiently high to cover risks already so divided. We repeat our opinion formerly expressed that the public could not have a lighter shure of the burden laid on their shoulders if they are to take any steps in the establishment of steamers at all.

A long letter which appears in our columns to-day again attempts to vindicate the first immigration resolutions of the Provincial Council. We were in hopes that the supporters of those resolutions had at last come to the same opinions of their wisdom on the subject as the public out of doors. We regret therefore that to-day's correspondent should go over the same commonplaces as were talked ad nauseam'during the debate on the subject. Nobody denied the fact that immigration must be regulated ; of course it must; but we should be very sorry to see it regulated by such resolutions as those first passed by the Council on the subject. We have commented on them before at some length, and need net again drag them before the public in their extraordinary crudity. They certainly were a very funny mixture of timid general principles and hap-hazard details. We cannot find a single argument in our correspondent's letter to-day. He talks a good deal about Victoria and a state of society totally different from ours. But in the name of common sense what does he mean by talking about " the theories of Louis Blanc and the desperate contrivances of Louis Napoleon" apropos of an expenditure of £20:000. The Council certainly did vote large sums for public works ; a grea t

deal too large a sum considering their contraded ideas about immigration. We feel tempted to introduce something about the Grand Cham of Tartary and the Great Mogul in reply to our historical correspondent, but we refrain in consideration for our readers' nerves. We shouldflike " J." B." to explain his closing sentence, which is somewhat enigmatical : " If, however, inconver.ience should arise from it (the discussion), the blame rests with those who commenced it." What is the " inconvenience ?" Whose is the " inconvenience ?" Why should the " inconvenience arise?" Who will blame? And who commenced it ? And what does the whole supposition mean when parsed and construed ? Is it intended to be a pregnant hint? 'Or is it only to convey as much meaning as the rest of the letter ? We give it up, O Sphynx ! Now, the question which was before the Council, when it virtually reversed the previous vote on immigration was, whether we were not :n a position when any appear-

ance even of timidity on the subject of

immigration would be baneful to the province. There had been no call for the interference of the Council in detail, and on the general question it had shown itself either wilfully or negligently blind to the real state of the colony. The last census has shown that there is an amount of capital in this province, in proportion to the population, which is almost unprecedented. The want of labour and the means of making it instantly useful are greater here than in most other young colonies ; we have large public works going on, and the prospects of farmers would be improving if they could only see their way to labour. £20,000 is at our disposal, and our Councillors get frightened and want to subdivide the amount and spread it over a considerable space of time. These same gentlemen voted for a considerable expense in order to send home an agent of very superior qualifications, and then they begin to mistrust his discretion in the expenditure of this marvellous sum of money. Might he not flood the country with paupers? and all with £20,000. We ask the public whether they are prepared to submit tothissort of " Slowboy " legislation; whether they are prepared to see us left behind by neighbours with infinitely smaller resources ? We have asked a large num. ber ot men of all classes in the community • —merchants, runholders, farmers, labourers, and all have the same opinion of the slow obstructive " Wouter van Twiller " policy of the Council. Is there no mean between "Yankee" progress and Dutch phlegm. We want more energy, more life and knowledge of business in the Council. .Will constituencies be always satisfied with representatives who stop whatever active | movement there may be in Government, to prate about their privileges and their rights, and their determination to make a stand against the encroachments of Government, in the most approved stage-patriot style. We have been unwillingly brought back again to the subject of the inertness of the Provincial Council. The present Council is virtually dead. We must look forward with hope to the next. We are happy in not. believing in the doctrine of transmigration ; for we should be sorry to look forward to the occupation of the new body by the soul of the last. The enterprise of the community should be represented !>y a more stirring and active spirit. In conclusion, we would ask our readers to compare the resolutions of the Council with the short Immigration Regulations put forward by the Government. The latt ei at least understood the subject.