Untitled

Otago Daily Times, Issue 4170, 30 June 1875, Page 2

fir referring, as we did in our Saturday's issue, to a peculiarity of the reporb of the Sanitary Committee brought up for adoption at the last meeting of the City Council, we took occasion to remark that there were other peculiarities in the report, to which it was probable we should refer on a future occasion. We take the present opportunity of doing so in respect, at least, to one of them. In view of obtaining from the Corporation Solicitors the draft of a Bill to " remedy all known defects" in the Public Health Act, the Committee recommend, "That power be obtained to compel all owners of houses within the city to construct a brick and cement cesspool at each house to the satisfaction, of the Council; and that the Council obtain power to construct such cesspools on the property of absentees, the cost thereof to be a charge upon the owners in succession of any such properties, and to be recoverable in a summary way—the Council to contract for a periodical cleaning of all cesspools within the c:ty." Councillor Fish was for adopting this clause right off, but after Councillor Woodland had delivered himself of some important remarks respecting the special advantages of the "fan system," it was finally resolved, on Couricillor Pkos.sek's motion, "That consideration of this clause be deferred till next meeting." We fancy we can al-

ready hear some impatient, City Coun^' cillor, or other less dignified reader, exclaim : -'Well now, after all, what is there peculiar about this recommendation? Surely, you do not oppose the SanitaryCommittee taking every possible means to preserve the health of the citizens?" To which we reply, most assuredly not. But the peculiarity to which we refer is this ;- The recommendation referred to entirely ignores or reserves the Council's previous actions and decisions in respect to the matter with which it deals. We have a very vivid recollection of a time — and not long since either — when tin* not over savoury subject of Cesspools v. Earth-closets, both in and out of the Council, was discussed with considerable energy and perseverance. Finally it was admitted on all hands that " earth-closets " had the best of it, and that after numerous trials of an imported model. If our memory serves us, the members of the City Council finally resolved that, so far as they had power, they would enforce the system throughout the city. This fact was notified by official announcements in the Press, and citizens were informed that earth for use of the closets where necessary would be supplied (grati-*) by the Corporation. Subsequently, however, the Council seems to have wavered in its decision, for when the City Solicitors' notice appeared setting forth the various powers that would be asked from the Assembly in the Bill that was to have been prepared but -was not, the matter was referred to thus :— •'' To compel householders in the said city to use brick cesspools or earth-closets." Here then is the peculiarity to which we refer ; that a pnblie body like the City Council should go on resolving and re-resolving, first this way and then that way, to the confusion and annoyance of every law-abiding citizen who feels naturally anxious to carry its behests, as far as lays in his power, into effect. We happen to know of not a few instances in which, subsequent to the notification to which we have referred, persons have gone to considerable trouble and expense to carry into effect what seemed to them to be so wise a resolution as that come to by the Council in respect to the "earth-closet system." Let it be understood that we express no opinion whatever about the wisdom or otherwise of the recommendation considered jicr sc, but what we do object to is that the Council, as a body, should proceed to discuss and vote upon every subject that conies before it in perfect ignorance or utter forgetfulness of what has previously been done, or resolved to be done, in regard to the same matter. To prevent the repetition and perpetuation of this state of things we suggest the appointment of a " City Remembrancer." It would really be much more economical, and save a vast amount of needless talking and opposite voting on the part of Councillors themselves, and a vast amount of annoyance and vexation to the citizens generally.