The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1903. HARBOUR REPRESENTATION.

Timaru Herald, Volume XIIC, Issue 13652, 22 July 1908, Page 4

The Timaru Herald WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1903. HARBOUR REPRESENTATION.

Some amendment in the law. regulating the election-'of'members of the Timaru Harbour Board ought to- follow the disclosure made by Mr Maslin yesterday when he was ■ discussing with our representative the result of the poll taken on Monday to «lccb a, successor to -Mr Fraser, who for so many years represented the combined district comprising the Temuka, borough and the Temuka, road board district. In case there should bo any mistake on the point, we desire .'to .say at the outset) that we are nob ■■; criticising the choice of the electors, -nor, we "are sure, would either Mr Maslin or Mr Talbob desire to do so. It is not because an experienced administrator of local affairs has been defeated by a. comparatively . unknown man in public life that' we are now drawing attention to.the position disclosed by this byelection! We have no doubt that ' Mr Armitage will become a, useful member of the Harbour Board, ami that the combined district of which he m now the representative will have no reason to regret his return. Bub id is impossible to escape the conviction that in his candidature he enjoyed an immense advantage over his opponent in the double voting qualification in "the borough which gave him the great majority he. secured on Monday. Perhaps it was fortunate' that the majority in'this case was-so ' decisive, as otherwise the anomaly in the electoral qualifications as between borough and county' might have remained hidden even longer than it has done. The seriousness of the whole thing lies in'the fact that what has happened in Teimika, may equally well- happen ■ in Geraldine and : Waimate also, so that the great preponderance of representation on *he Harbour Board really lies in 'the power of - the four boroughs in South Canterbury,''"•while the country districts, which find the greater part of 'he harbour rate,-.can, easily be deprived of an effective voice in its. control. The) disproportion is explained in another, column, ' where it; is shown that although • the rateable value of the "Temuka Road Board district is nearly eight ; times that of the Temuka- borough, -,yet the voting power of the latter is greater than that of the former. - : This would ■ not matter if .there- were no such thing as a ; ,harbour rate, but as Mr.. Maslin . points out, the ' Harbour- Board was made an elective body

because if. was given rating powers. Obviously, therefore, it is anomalous that the power of election rests in the hands of that part of the combined district which finds only a, tithe of the rate. The discrepancy is caused by the municipal qualification in the borough, which confers votes not only upon the ratepayer and his wife or her husband as the; cose may be, but also upon a, tenant (under, the residential qualification) and his wife or her husband. It is possible therefore for a oot.ia.ge in Temiuka. to confer the right of voting for a member of the Harbour Board upon no fewer than four persons, whilst in the county, only ratepayers possess this right, and the right does not extend to the ratepayer's married partner. As the power of levying of rates is the reason for the elective character of the Board, it is quite ridiculous that a small borough property should carry four times the voting power of the) largest farm in the county. We have no doubt ihafc Mr Arroibage himself will lecognise the inequality of the system as readily as anyone, and that he will support any action the Board may see tit to take in order to remove the disability under which portions of counties associated with boroughs are now labouring. We tirust that the Board will feel it their duty to move in the matter, and that they will be able to discover a workable method of removing the anomaly. The only feasible system/ that suggests itself to us at present is to place the borough upon the same footing as the county, so that in each only bona fido ratepayers should be eligible to participate m the election of members of the Harbour Board. The necessary provision could 1 no doubt be made in the Harboura Bill which will probably come'before the nexb Parliament.