1.—9

30

however, thirty-four members of Council would be elected as against one by town district. No saving could be effected by change if administration to remain equally effective. Town population, approximately, equal to population of whole of rest of county.—Bates, Chairman. Ormondville Town Board. —Ormondville Town Board disapprove new Counties Bill as bearing on existing Town Boards, and hope that present Boards be allowed to remain, and have all existing powers and privileges, as the Counties Bill would do away with all such powers and privileges to the local bodies, and in this way keep back townships which would under old Act make headway, as members of present Town Board are always on the spot to see necessary work done immediately, which be conclusively proved by time and money being saved; whereas, if controlled by County, delay is often ruinous to small progressive towns. Otautau Town Board. —The Otautau Town Board strongly protests against any interference with its status as a local body, and regards the suggestion to abolish Town Boards as a retrograde movement in connection with local government. Further, this Board is co-operating with other Boards in resisting such unnecessary and harassing legislation.—Geo. Gilchrist, Town Clerk. Outram Town Board. —We consider the proposal to abolish Town Boards a retrograde step, and enter our protest to the proposed alteration as suggested by the Counties Act. We would point out that we have been in existence since 1882, and the Board has carried out its duties to the entire satisfaction of the ratepayers in this district during that time. We have carefully husbanded our funds, and now enjoy the privilege of a good water-supply and electric light, no debt, no liabilities, no arrears of rates.—Wm. Snow, Chairman. Papakura Town Board. —Batepayers strongly object to Papakura Town Board being dissolved, or present working under Town Districts Act interfered with. Since district constituted Town Board great progress has been made ; good roads and footpaths and recreation-ground provided; result, very considerable increase in population, value of land almost doubled. Formerly Papakura was part of large road district, consequently rates spent miles away. Present cost of administration about £10 yearly.—James Walker, Chairman. Raleigh Tmvn Board. —Board and community strongly object to Counties Bill. Consider retrograde movement, and proposed representation disastrous to successful administration town district. Councillors, excepting representatives of town ridings, no direct interest in welfare township. Sections 57 to 60, Part VII., provides sub-committee, who would be nominative, and probably not have confidence of ratepayers, and actions harassed by subserviency of Council, as against present system of elective administration by ratepayer. Sixty-eight directly interested to town district's welfare as residents, whose services are, moreover, purely voluntary. Protest strongly against interference present administration. Letter following. —Ogle, Chairman. Raleigh Toion Board. —l beg to acknowledge receipt of your telegam re County Councils Bill, under which it is proposed to abolish Town Boards, and, in confirmation of my telegram already forwarded, to lay before your Committee the reason why the Board strongly protests against the clauses relating to the abolition of Town Boards. That under the provisions of the Bill town districts would not receive anything like adequate attention from members of a County Council, as individually they would not have any direct interest in the welfare and prosperity of the township, not being residents, and not being identified with its requirements. As at present constituted, Town Boards are composed of men who reside in the township, who have a direct interest in its welfare, and are therefore well fitted to look after its requirements. Certain members are also appointed a Works Committee, and the duty they undertake is to make themselves daily conversant with the many needs that are always requiring attention, and to have such needs attended to. Under the new Bill this particular work would undoubtedly be more or less neglected, and the township suffer accordingly. The present representation of Town Boards is, moreover, in no way cumbersome or expensive, and instead of the administration being merged into a County Council it should, in the opinion of this Board, be fostered and assisted more liberally than at present. The work of the Commissioners is purely voluntary, whereas with County Councils there are numerous incidental expenses of members which would considerably increase the cost of administration. It is, moreover, quite apparent that members of County Councils living many miles away cannot possibly attend to the wants of a township in anything like the manner that Commissioners (who are residents) do; neither could they be expected to devote the time (which would always be at the Council's expense) to matters away from their own particular riding. It is obvious by the framing of the Bill that these difficulties have been apparent, as in Part VII., sections 57 to 60, provision is made for the election of Committees (either Councillors or others) to administrate town districts, or, in other words, to take the place of present Town Boards. In the opinion of this Board, such administration would prove disastrous to the welfare of townships, and in no way as effective as the present system. The Committee would then be a nominative one, and consequently would not have the entire confidence of the ratepayers, seeing they had no choice in the selection of such Committee; whereas at present Commissioners are elected by the wish of the ratepayers at the ballot-box, and, as already pointed out, are the men best qualified to perform the work required. In conclusion, this Board strongly urges upon your Committee the necessity of Town Boards with their present powers being retained, as it sees no reason why this satisfactory and inexpensive form of local government should be interfered with; and, further, feels convinced that the passing of the Counties Bill as at present framed would be a retrograde step, as under its provisions local government will not be carried out as judiciously or as economically as under the present local bodies.—W. W. Ogle, Chairman. Southbridge Town Board. —Southbridge Town Board protests against proposed abolition of Town Boards. This Board recognises that previous to its formation, sixteen years ago, Boad Board local management was inimical to district's best interests, gradual accumulation of property for use of ratepayers amounting to £600. Improvement of streets, introducing water-races, have