The Lyttelton Times. TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1877.

Lyttelton Times, Volume XLVII, Issue 5012, 13 March 1877, Page 2

The Lyttelton Times. TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 1877.

In M'Millan’s Magazine, for April, 1576, there ia an able article on Local Taxation and Local Administration. It is written by Mr K. N. PaJgiave, the son of Sir Francis Palgrave, who wrote a valuable essay on Corporate Reform more than forty years ago. We had not seen that article when we recently wrote on the subject of our Charitable Institutions, but there is a quotation in it from Ricardo’s remarks on the administration of the poor laws, which strongly corroborates the views which we then expressed as to the inadvisability of altogether devolving the cost and administration of those institutions on the Colony at large in place of securing local support and local management. Mr Ricardo says :—“ It is not by rais- “ ing in any manner different from the “ present the fund from which the poor “ are supported that the evil can be “ mitigated. It would not only be no “ improvement, but it would be an “ aggravation of the distress which we “ wish to see removed, if the fund were “ increased in amount, or were levied, “ according to some late proposals, as a “ general fund from the country at “ large. The present mode of its col- “ lection and application has served to “ mitigate its pernicious effects. Each “ parish raises a separate fund for the “ support of its own poor. Hence, it “ becomes an object of more interest “ and more practicability to keep the “ rates low, than if one general fund “ were raised for the relief of the poor “ of the whole kingdom. A parish is “ much more interested in an econo- “ mical collection of the rate, and a “ sparing distribution of relief, when “ the whole saving will be for its own “ benefit, than if hundreds of other “ parishes were to partake of it.” If these remarks are applicable, as they will generally be admitted to bo, to a country like England with a dense population, and with every facility for central administration, they are much more applicable to Now Zealand thinly peopled, possessing Provincial districts colonised from distinct centres, and quite unfitted by physical, social, and political conditions to bo governed in local matters, which are necessarily numerous in kind, by a central authority. The question, however, is not one of degree but one of principle. And wo are glad to know that so eminent an authority as Ricardo should distinctly recognise the principle that the fund for tie relief of the poor can only bo properly maintained and administered locally. Our present object ia to consider, from the view presented in the article referred to with respect to the United Kingdom, the general subject of Local Taxation and Administration as applicable to this Colony. Now tnat Provinces are abolished, it is the question of the day. We are drifting on a confused sea, miscalled local Self-Govern-ment, into the vortex of Centralism, and we are doing so at great cost to ourselves, and with great damage to the public interests. Publicity is what is required. Let the eyes of the public bo once opened to the expensive and pernicious sham which has been substituted for real local Self-Government, and to the fearful danger right ahead; and the result is sure. Public opinion is often

temporarily misled, but its error, at least in British communities, ia only tho magnetic variation o£ time and place on tho ono side or tho other; its true and lasting tendency is to truth, as that o£ tho noodlo to tho polo. Mr Palgravo quotes tho following remark of M. do Parion, which is very applicable oven now to England and her Colonics « While tho tendency of tho present « day is to divulge everything which “ concerns tho national revenue, aud to •« sot it forth in Budgets communicated “to the public, local taxation bides “ itself, on tho contrary, in tho shade.” Tho system of grants in aid of local expenditure is thus referred to by Mr Palgrave: —“ It does not soom that a “ system of grants in aid is likely to “ prove of any real service, unless “ accompanied, by what is very diili- “ cult to provide—efficient Govorn- “ ment supervision. It if P° r- “ sisted in, unless guarded by tho “ most carofol regulations, go far “ towards breaking down the feeling of “ local responsibility, which is tho only “ strong point in our existing local “ government.” WhUo wo agroo that efficient Government supervision—if by that is meant official publicity and audit of accounts—is essential to these grants in aid, wo do not agree in tho opinion, which we suspect is intended, that Government control of tho expenditure is advisable. When a grant in aid is handed over to a local elective body, that grant should bo expended, subject to tho conditions which we have named, on tho responsibility and under the direction solely of that body. Divided responsibility and divided control will only lead to confusion and conflict, to waste and inefficiency. Nor are we averse, in tho circumstances of a Colony, to public grants in aid of local taxation. We see no reason why ratepayers should not have, in addition to their rates, a portion of their general contribution to the revenue returned to them for local purposes. And that is really what grants in aid amount to, if given on a fixed basis of general distribution. In rural districts, especially where the country has to be opened up and settled, such aid from the State is a legitimate and prudent application of a part of its funds. The money so granted, if there is real local self-government, is more likely to be expended economically and efficiently than if expended by the central authority. The general object of Mr Palgrave’a article is to suggest the advisability of consolidating various local bodies throughout England, and investing these larger ood'es with larger powers. These bodies, in. bis opinion, could work effectively through Commitees on special local subjects—such Committees to be responsible to the parent body. He argues that the chief object is to endeavour to enlist the whole power of local interest on the side of good local government, and that, within reasonable limits, the wider the field and the greater the importance of the duties to be performed are, the more probable is the prospect of obtaining the essential aid and co-operation of the inhabitants best fitted by position and intelligence to carry on local administration. He is not, however, an Abolitionist. “It is best,” he says, “ whenever it is possible, to preserve old “ names, and to improve, not to swoop “ away, old institutions.” We wish that the spirit of this sentiment had animated our rulers when they set themselves to the work of destruction. There was before them, if they had chosen to avail themselves of it, a noble opportunity of adapting to the whole Colony a comprehensive and congenial system of local self-government. The seed had been sown; the tree had grown, too luxuriantly perhaps, but still it had within it, if properly pruned and trained, the promise of good fruit. Out it down, was the cry; why cumbereth it the ground ? And now we are expected to gather grapes from thorns and figs from thistles. It would be absurd to expect in the details of Mr Palgrave’s suggestions on the subject of local Government in England any exact applicability to this Colony. But there is throughout those suggestions a principle which we thoroughly recognise as even more applicable to our circumstances. It is the principle of large local elective bodies for the management of the more important local affairs in large homogeneous districts. At the same time wo should not contemplate in this Colony—and he does not contemplate it at Home —the merging of Municipal and Rural Boards into one Board. Neither should wo, in the preesent circumstances of the Colony, incorporate Road Boards into the proposed large Board. Whatever may be the case in England, each here would have its appropriate sphere of important duty. Mr Palgrave incidentally refers to a letter of Mr William Rathbone to the London Times of Nov. 30, 187-1, on Local Administration. We have read this letter, and as it is very able, and in jnauy respects apposite to our position, we shall in another article notice its contents.