Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price 1d. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1885. Peccant County Councillors.

Wairarapa Standard, Volume XVIII, Issue 1737, 23 September 1885, Page 2

Wairarapa Standard Published Tri-weekly, Price Id. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 23, 1885. Peccant County Councillors.

The working of local Government institutions in this colony occasionally presents some startling developments. It is only recently that some of the Borough Councillors in "Wanganui were prosecuted and held liable in enormous penalties for entering into business contracts with the Council and supplying goods to that body. We fancy, that by means of Parliamentary intervention, the sinning Wanganui Councillors mav get out of their difficulty without heavy loss to their pockets, as on more complete investigation it has been found that their offence was not so bad as it appeared to be at first. But we now learn from a Parliamentary paper that the County Council of Inangahua have for some years past, been playing “ ducks and drakes ” with the public funds in their hands. This sort of thing has gone on very smoothly and pleasantly for a long time, but lately the AuditorGeneral overhauled the accounts of this Inangahua County Council and made some very remarkable and startling discoveries therein, which he has duly laid before Parliament in an official report. We gather from this document that these Inangahua Councillors made it their leading principle “ to take care of number one,” and acting upon that dictum, they voted themselves for “ travelling expanses,” in order to attend meetings of the Council. A moderate allow* ance might reasonably enough have been made for this purpose to members living in the country who had to come a considerable distance to attend the Council meetings ; but it seems that the members living in the County town—who had not to travel at all—got an allowance to the extent of £2OO 8s 9d for their apocryphal “ expenses.” Then the publicans complained that their license fees were too high—though they were of the amount fixed by law—so the Council gave them a refund of £l7O. The “ bungs,” no doubt, were grateful for this generosity and perhaps returned the compliment by allowing the Mayor and Councillors to stick up a liberal score for 11 free drinks.” Then the County Council took to getting up petitions t-> Parliament—probably for increased money subsidies and grants in aid—and in that way expended £415 9s Id of tho County funds. Now some folks must have made a glorious haul out of the getting up of these Parliamentary petitions, when so large a sum as this was expended on them. Just think of it. Mo lefSthan £415 9s Id for getting up a few Parliamentary petitions, To draft a Parliamentary petition need not cost more than a couple of guineas, and riding about the country 'o obtain signatures to it, would be fairly enough paid at a fee of £1 per lay. How the dickens then could ibis £413 9s Id have been spent over these petitions F But these Comity Councillors had other ways of making the money fly ( Jbey held political meetings and entercalH"l! distinguished visitor* to public dinners,

and charged what Mr Mantilini would call “ the dimnition sum total ” which in this case amounted to £4Ol 14s lOd expenditure for miscellaneous purposes-—to the County Council fund. The Councillors also thought it well to indulge m a pleasure trip to the Christchurch Exhibition, which they accordingly did, and used £l3B 7s 6d of County funds to pay the expenses of the “ outing.” Theu, not satisfied with all these “ fishy ” trans actions, the Council next went in for the acclimatisation of fish, and spent £76 12s 8d for that purpose. They also gave a present of £IOO to an M.H.R., for some “ secret service.” Reckoning up the whole thing, it appears that the Council spent a sum of £2287 12s Id, of which the Auditor-General declares £1527 7s 6d to have been altogether illegal expenditure, and £762 4s 7d of dubious legality. The question arises, Cannot those peccant County Councillors be brought to hook and compelled, by legal process, to refund all this monstrous and illegal expenditure of public monies out of their own pockets ? Well—yes—they could be compelled to do so—always supposing the individual Councillors had sufficient assets amongst them to pay up, when judg - ment had issued against them. But we fancy that these fine, free and easy Councillors will never be compelled to pay up, Any Inaugahua ratepayer could institute the necessary legal proceedings against the Councillors, but no one is likely to do so, and unless the Government should take proceedings, those swindlers and illegal appropriates of public funds will escape altogether scot free. We hope the Auditor-General will now turn his attention to the accounts of other County Councils. It is just possible that some further startling discoveries would follow a general investigation in that direction. In making this suggestion we do not for a moment intend reference to the County Councils in the Wairarapa district. We have every reason to believe that all the members of these two County Councils are honorable and fair dealing men, and that the accounts of those bodies are entirely fair and above board. But it may not be so in the case of some other County Councils in various parts of the colony, and after the revelations of the Inaugahua business we should like to see a general overhaul of accounts take place.