The Western Star. (PUBLISHED BI-WEEKLY) SATURDAY, AUGUST 1, 1885.

Western Star, Issue 969, 1 August 1885, Page 2

The Western Star. (PUBLISHED 81-WEEKLY) SATURDAY, AUGUST 1, 1885.

The battle of Road Board v. County Council is again being fought out in

this district, but despite the strenuous efforts of that doughty Road Hoard champion, Dr Hodgkinson, recent discussions have shown that since the question was last before the ratepayers there have been considerable desertions from the ranks of the Road Hoard supporters. The question lias been revived upon a notice of ’noii'cn has ini’ been given in the Road Hoard that the special order passed some time ago handing over tho control of the Hoard’s affairs to the Council be resein ed—apparently as a prelude to tho Ho ird levying a full rate and again resuming active work. This notice of motion excited a counter blast. iu the shape of

a notice of motion affirming the.desirability of the Board committing suicide —or in other words, of completing their already half-finished work, that of merging in the county. If the latter proposition be carried, a verdict of felo de sc could scarcely be brought in against the ratepayers. After all that has been advanced by Dr Hodgkinsoa against extinguishing the Road Board—aud his opponents must admit that, theoretically, he has the best of the argument —the ratepayers are themselves the best judges of the prats tical.working of the two bodies and as to the ability of the settlers to pay and the actual benefit to be derived from a double rate. • These are the _ real practical points upon which the issue should be decided, and. .upon’which the settlers are quite competent to arrive at a decision satisfactory to themselves, and, consequently, to the country at large. Compared with such questions, the contention of Dr Hodgkinson that England and America and many of the leading colonial statesmen favor the Roail Board or other similar system as the unit of the machinery of local self-government, will receive but very little attention. A good deal, of nonsense has been uttered by the champions of both sides of the question as to the respective economy of Road Board and County management. The charges of squandering money and extravagance levelled at both bodies are charges that might be made against any local body, and as a matter of fact invariably are,by one or other section of those interested, who, rightly or wrongly, imagine that they do not receive anything like a fair share of expenditure. But, as is the ease with all local governing bodies,it is really the ratepayers themselves who are to blame in such cases ; it is they who return the members, and if they chose to exert their influence, they can always bring such pressure to bear as to baulk any member who is inclined to run a devious course. In considering the respective economy of the two systems, the question simply resolves itself into this : Can one strong body (given the name either of Road Board or County Council) ' perform the work more economically and to better advantage than a number of small bodies with all their duplicate machinery? The answer, we think, is obvious. Qne of the stongest barriers to merging is the objection frequently urged against the comparatively small representation in the Council. Undoubtedly nine men are not competent to exercise that detailed supervision over the County that is desirable, in the interests of the members themselves as well as the ratepayers and county geuerally. Given increased representation, the Council would be greatly popularised, andthe question of merging would soon be settled. Of course, increased representation means increased expense, but the small extra outlay would he more than compensated for by the advantages which would thereby be conferred. Under the special order the Board has relegated its duties to the Council; a nominal rate of one farthing in the pound is levied, which, after deducting interest and sinking fund on debt, leaves but a pittance for expenditure on roads, &c. Like Mahomet’s coffin, it is hung up, and like that venerable myth it is at present neither of use nor ornament. Those who advocate the Board resuming its powers aud levying its full rate urge one of the only two really practical and beneficial courses that can be taken, the other, it is needless to say, b. ing to affirm the desirability of merging. The question has now been before the ratepayers for a number of years, and the subject has been discussed threadbare ; a substantial reward would fail in calling forth a now remark on either side. What wait they for, then ? For fresh legislation ? The bent of the Counties Act Amendment now before Parliament, instead of encouraging Road Boards, is towards consolidating the County system, so that there is nothing to hope for from that direction and nothing to be gained by delay. If the settlers are willing to pay a double rate, the Board should levy same and proceed to work ; if on the other hand they are adverse to dipping their hands into" their pockets deeper than there is any absolute necessity for, the Road district should be merged in the County without delay.