The Star. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1877.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 2765, 9 February 1877, Page 2

The Star. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 9, 1877.

" Poverty does not reside within the boundaries of Municipalities. In the case of Christchurch, for example, it will be found that by far the larger part eaastsjusfe outside the Town belt." Suoh as bhe -argument adduced in this morning's Press for not subjecting charitable institutions to Municipalmanagement. * ' -jCbjfib.firstiPentqnce is as a » ,.m^|en 5 .sf ' f aet/absotyJ*sy. false j aq.<j the writer, apparently perceiving this, goes on to qualify it by a jest of that

species which is supposed to be stamped with the Hibernian patent mark. " In the case of Ohristchurch," we are informed, " by far the larger amount (of poverty) exists just outside." "We believe that this is the only jest perpetrated by our contemporary within the memory of the oldest inhabitant, and it is refreshing to find that, though the years have not brought the philosophic mind, they have not altogether smothered the pleasant peculiarities of early youth. It was, however, scarcely justifiable to go so very | far out of the path of truth in order to bring in the joke. A little wandering is, of course, permissible under Buch circumstances, but surely to assert in a leading article that poverty does not reside in Municipalities is going rather too far. The briefest consideration of the statement would have shown that it is absolutely antagonistic to all experience both in old and new countries, but that, if it is more untrue in one case than the other, it is in the case of the new countries — that is, the Colonies. The agricultural poor at home are poor enough in all conscience, but their poverty and misery is as nothing . compared with tbat found within the cities. But in the Colonies there are very few rural poor, and such poverty as exists is found almost wholly within the Municipalities. The I'ress argues that the poor dwell in the suburbs of Christchurch, where rent is cheaper, and from this assumed circumstance our contemporary generalises for tbe whole Colony. The argument is only sound as regards Christchurch in an infinitesimal degree. As a rule, there are far more signs of comfort to be seen amongst the cottagers living in the suburbs than amongst those living in the town. As regards the other principal cities of the Colony, Auckland, Dunedin, and Wellington, the above generalisation is wholly at variance with the facts. This, however, iB not the only astounding statement made in the article to which we refer. It is alleged that "Christchurch with its suburbs is but a temporary resting place for hundreds of immigrants." Of all the nonsense that our contemporary has from time to time put into print this is perhaps its prize essay in balderdash, and we will not do our readers the injustice of supposing that they cannot see its ridiculous character for themselves. The resident citizens should not, however, forget that they are, in the opinion of the Press, so insignificant as not to be worth taking into consideration at all. As to the subject of the article the writer confines himself to raising objections to what has been proposed by everbody else in regard to the administration of charitable institutions. On another occasion some suggestions as to the principles and practical methods, to be observed in organising a system of charitable relief, are to be brought forth for the public enlightenment. "We will not criticise those suggestions by anticipation, but we may Bay tbat if they are as crudely conceived, and as childishly advocated as are the objections urged this morning to systems already proposed, it would be better that they should remain for ever in the wilds of contem porary phantasy, where they are safe from injury by the slightest contact with wbat is real or practical. In conclusion, it is only right to say we do not believe that either the misstatements or the witticism to which we havo referred were deliberate. They were probably .pure accidents, caused by the concentration of our contemporary's mind upon the one object of giving an appearance of profundity to the article, as great as was consistent with the most extreme economy of thought.