The Lyttelton Times. SATURDAY, JUNE 3, 1865.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XXIII, Issue 1408, 3 June 1865, Page 4

The Lyttelton Times. SATURDAY, JUNE 3, 1865.

The Provincial Council has gone actively about its work, and has already disposed of one or two out of the few subjects for the consideration of which it it was summoned. The West Coast Eoad Expenditure is sanctioned; the City Council Ordinance has virtually received _approval; and leave has been given to the Government to pay for the Rakaia Railway in land if they cannot do so in sterling coin. Thursday evening's debate will probably be found to have been the principal, if not the only one, of the present session. The whole question of the Rakaia railway contract was virtually before the Council, though, from the wording of the resolution proposed by the Government, the discussion turned principally upon the advisability of paying a portion of the cost in land. So far as the question of proceeding with the Railway was raised, but little difference of opinion was expressed. Not a single member objected to railway extension, on the line proposed or any other, upon abstract principle. Some did hesitate to say that the time was favourable for begining the work, and a larger number urged with much force that other works, such as those for the improvement of Harbour accommodation, ought to have been first undertaken. The proposal to pay 9, portion of the purchase money in debentures, at ten per cent, discount, also excited a share of objection; but the real point raised was the payment in land. The proposal of the Government was that, if the province should be unable to provide cash for the full amount, Messrs. Holmes and Co. should, according to their contract, receive land at the fixed price of £2 an acre in lieu of cash, up to £50,000, The iesolution authorizing this part of the contract was finally carried by a large majority; and we are not displeased that the Government were so far successful. We certainly think the plan objectionable for many reasons. But, as the Government had taken so bold a step, they deserved a compliment rather .than a reproof from the country; and it was a just tribute to their somewhat unusual vigour to give them free play with their design. Besides, the most serious ground of objection was irremediable. It consisted in the mere fact of putting such terms into a contract which had to be published; and the mischief was done when the announcement was made. The mere fact that the province is going into an expenditure which it does not hope to meet in the ordinary way, but which has to be provided for by special devices and extraordinary dealings with its resources, is calculated to do a vast deal of harm to the credit of Canterbury in the eyes of those who take a distant and superficial view of the [affair. Unfortunately we are a good deal at the mercy of distant and superficial observers, and we have very insufficient means of removing false impressions when they once have got abroad. The Council could not remedy this, and it did the best it could by a very intelligible protest against the principle, in which protest the members of the Government themselves concurred. The terms of payment, however, are to remain as they were; only it is understood that land is not to be granted unless money is absolutely not forthcoming when it is wanted. There is another objection to the terms of payment, which is also irremediable. There can be no reasonable doubt that the actual expense of the work was increased by the introduction of special terms of payment. Mr. Hall admitted this, when he begged members not to compel the Government to pay cash, because it would remove the prospect of obtaining better terms from the contractors. If better terms may be had for cash, it is obvious that worse terms have been submitted to for want of cash; and the province has actually lost a Hum of money by the railway contract being let at so unfortunate a moment iu our history. We think it quite possible that the contractors and the Government would, both of them, endeavour to prove this view incorrect; and it is only because Mr. Hall, in the heat of debate on one part of the whole question, i 111) occnl ly declared his real view of the arrangement, that the suspicions we previously expressed on this subject are confirmed. We place full faith in the declaration of the Government that the power to grant laud will not be used unless stern necessity compel*; the step. Tor that reason we should lutve been glad if the Council had reserved to itself'the right to determine at the time whether the power shall be used. The contract enables the Government in time of financial difficulty to do one of two things— either to pay in land, as far as £50,000, or to stop the works altogether. It ought to be for the Council to decide which of these eonidcs shall be taken. For the question

between them resolves itself into one of broad finance. Look at the land payment m what way we may, it stands as an expenditure from the funds of the year. The land most desirable for purchase will be taken, and will be equivalent to cash. We have not intended to construct railways, which will benefit our descendants, at the expense of the present generation only, but to spread their cost oyer a large number of years by employing borrowed money. It ib a right which the Council ought to reserve to itself, to determine whether a great work of this nature shall be pushed on at a particular juncture, so as to absorb the available resources of the immediate present, or shall await the supply of that class of means which should properly be devoted to it.