The New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1885.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXII, Issue 7403, 11 August 1885, Page 4

The New Zealand Herald. AND DAILY SOUTHERN CROSS. TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1885.

» I Wk have before us a statement signed by the Oity Treasurer which was communicated to the Council last Thursday night in response to questions asked by Mr. Upton. It is a summary of expenditure for four months ending July 31. If anything were required to justify the action of those councillors

81.426

*14,718

£50,

71,515

Deficiency (or ISSi 85 .. .. £21,079 —that is to say, the Council in 1884-5 exceeded the revenue by £21,000: and there can be little doubt that the above estimate for 1885-6. based on the present rate of expenditure, and compared with the previous year's transactions, is well within the mark. Carried away by the plethora of money at their disposal, the Council seems to have completely disregarded the necessary subordination of expenditure to income. Their duty now is clear. It is to cut down their expenses from top to bottom. However hard it may be for tho3e who have to suffer, however painful it may be for those who have to insist on it, there is no alternative. Either the outlay must be made to fit the income or the citizens must submit to further taxation. "We will not ask who is responsible for this state of things. Probably the permanent staff must bear some of the blame, as it is inconceivable that the real state of matters has been made clear to the Council. But the Councillors themselves must be content to bear the largest share of the responsibility. They kept clamouring for works without thinking how the expenditure was to be borne. So long as they got what they wanted they were content to stumble on in the dark as to the state of the city's finances. The consequence is, that we have a deficiency in one year of £20,000, and a probable deficiency in another of £15,000. We have left out of this consideration any reference to loan expenditure, to which, however, we may refer on another occasion.

As our readers know, from specimens we have occasionally furnished, the Lyttelton Times has been wild in its advocacy of the Christchurch and Hokitika Railway. It abused all who questioned the scheme, or who even spoke a word for delay. It instructed the Canterbury representatives to vole against the San Francisco service unless the Auckland members would promise to vote for the East and West Coast Railway. It waxed eloquent on the business abilities and . high moral qualities of the delegates to London, and it was enthusiastic on the advantageous features of the Meiggs scheme. Now it says that the Meigg3 proposals were " preposterous," and is glad 'hat they are out of the way. This last remark refers of course to the additional particulars so carefully kept back by Sir Julius Yogel till the House had voted on the question of sending the whole matter to a Select Committee. But at first Sir Julius stated to the House that the Government would propose a resolution pledging the House to consent to the agreement made between the delegates and the Meiggs firm. If the Times and the Ministry had had their way the colony would by this time have been committed to proposals which are now

admitted by that journal to be preposterous. It never breathed a word about the terms being preposterous till there was no chance of their being agreed to. It never said a word in favour of waiting till it was seen whether the terms were preposterous or not. On the contrary, it abused everybody who was not ready to declare that the colony should undertake anything so that the railway should be made. But the Times, which on this subject undoubtedly represents Christchurch, now takes up a new line, It says that "every leader in the House having declared in favour of the railway; and only objected to certain methods of building it, the colony is now committed to the line, and it only remains to discuss the alternatives proposed by Sir J. Vogel and Sir G. Grey." We take leave to think that there are a few other matters to be discussed. There are other people in the colony besides those so-called "leaders." We grant that all those men who are termed leaders in the House have paltered with this question, and have not had the courage to speak honestly. Sir Julius Vogel was brought to the colony, and put, in the House, and in the Ministry, for this purpose. In all probability he will not be a "leader" much longer. As for Sir George Grey, he doe 3 not profess to lead a party. Major Atkinson, again, is fast forfeiting his position as a leader by his want of patriotism—his determination not to stand aside, even if it were for the benefit of the colony—and his many weak concessions of principle for the sake of political expediency. The attention of the colony has now been roused in respect to this railway, and also in respect to the financial position and prospects, and we say he would be a bold man who would stand up in the House and propose that New Zealand should go upon the money market to borrow money for the construction of this line. We observe that both in Christchurch and Dunedin the newspapers are taking up the old cry that the South Island must be separated from the North Island. They are not so insolent as they once were, when they spoke of the South island as a living body chained to a corpse, but they still seem to think that they would get on better if they were quit of us. Well, we are not averse to listen to proposals, if these Canterbury gentlemen will put them forward. At all events, if Canterbury must have that East and West Coast Railway, it had better consider how it can take the responsibility upon itself. These threats of agitation for insular separation do not frighten us in the least.