The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1877.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume I, Issue 56, 30 January 1877, Page 2

The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, JANUARY 30, 1877.

Some of the members of the Akaroa County Council appear to be undecided how to act, whether to adopt the Counties Act in its entirety, or to be content that the Council shall be merely a distributive body. They are to be commended for seeking for further information on this important question, and they cannot do better than study the speeches of the Chairman and Messrs. Baker and Dalglish, who appear to clearly understand the intention, and to have mastered most of the details of the Act. One objection urged against the adoption'of the Act in its entirety was that it was probably defective in some of its details, and therefore it would be best to wait until the defects were remedied. To us it appears that by far the better way would be to bring the Act into full operation, and then as defects arise they can be noted, and brought before Parliament at its next session. The Counties Act is a tenative measure, and how can a verdict be pronounced as to its suitability or not if it is not tried ? One statement made against the adoption of the Act was, that it would be easy for the lload Boards to co-operate to secure the services of an efficient engineer, as his salary would come out of one purse. The gentleman who. advanced this statement, for argument we cannot call it, appears never to have heard of the high authority which says :—" No man can serve two masters," and if this be true we would ask how is it possible for one engineer to serve seven or eight Eoad Boards ? The statement is too absurd to require further comment. Another objection was to the effect, that if the Council appointed one engineer, the distant ridings would never get the benefit of his services, as he would always be employed in Akaroa. Here again is a statement which betokens great ignorance on the part of the gentleman who made it. Akaroa is not within the jurisdiction of the County Council, it has its own local self-government, and surveyor, and consequently the services of the County Engineer would never be required within the Borough of Akaroa, There is one point which the members of the Council would do well to consider before they come to a decision. The Chairman very clearly pointed out that if the Council became simply a distributive body, it would lose its subsidy. Now it happens in the case of the County of Akaroa that the subsidy from the land fund will amount to somewhere about ten thousand pounds. Can the County afford to lose this sum ; because it is not at all probable that the Eoad Boards will get it to expend. As to the cry that the Council will levy a heavy- rate in addition to those raised by the Eoad Boards, we would ask whether it is likely that the members of the County Council would consent to tax themselves heavily, as well as others, for the mere pleasure of levying a rate ? The idea is ridiculous ! It is however, satisfactory to know that the majority of the County Councils are determining to work the Act in its entirety, and that those that have resolved to the contrary, begin already to repent of their folly.