RATING GRIEVANCE.

Timaru Herald, Volume XCVIII, Issue 18084, 21 September 1923, Page 7

RATING GRIEVANCE.

HISTORIC COMPARISON

By Telegraph—Press Association,

BLENHEIM, Thursday

Some time ago.the River [Boards controlling the Wairau watershed, amalgamated, subsequently taking in a new area of higher country never be lore included. The Board imposed a flat rata, including the new area, which objected to pay, because the board failed to classify according to statute law. Ihe board were advised that the rate was illegally struck, and that it must' classify, ’ which it proceeded to do. .1 ho new area contended that the classification was illusory and unjust, in that the higher situated properties rated number one should be number three, also that the new area is rated without representation on the board. The Magistrate heard the objections, and reserved his decision. The Government recently carried through, a clause in the Finauce Act, validating tiny rate illegally struck last year, including; the new •area in spite of the representations of the objectors that they are rated for a period when they were riot in the area of the board, and while they wove still without representation. Quoting the analogy of tlie New Boston tea partv, which resulted in the American War of Independence—“Dasli retrospective rating and rating without representation”— the objectors propose to carry thengrievance to Parliament, on the grounc. that, the Government’s action is subversive of a fundamental democratic principle.