The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14.

Akaroa Mail and Banks Peninsula Advertiser, Volume V, Issue 433, 14 September 1880, Page 2

The Akaroa Mail. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14.

When Sir Julius Vogel introduced his famous measure for the abolition of Provincial Institutions, one of the most powerful arguments used in favor of the proposed change was to the effect that under the new regime a system of real, simple and inexpensive local Government would be possible. Above all it was contended that the Land Fund would be strictly localised; under the Pro-' vincial system land might be sold in Ashbuvton and the proceeds of its sale could be expended in Ambnrley. Under the new system such iniquity was to bo impossible. A certain proportion of the Land Fund was- to become Colonial Revenue, but a fixed percentage was merely to pass pro forma through the Colonial Treasury and was in all eases to be returned to the local governing body of the locality whence it was derived.

Now, whatever diversity of opinion may exist on the propriety or otherwise of subsidies being contributed by the Consolidated Fund in aid ot the funds of local bodies, we imagine that there can hardly be two opinions on the propriety of the doctrine that receipts for the sale of land should be primarily liable for the cost of rendering the same lands available for settlement by the construction of roads, bridges, etc. Had this principle been rigidly adhered to from the first there would have been no difficulty whatever (at any rate in Canterbury and Otago, where land has been sold at a fair price) in forming all necessary public works, leaving their maintenance only chargeable on rates.

By the Financial Arrangements Act, which was rendered necessary by tlu . Abolition policy, it was provided thit 20 per cent of the proceeds of hind sales should bo returned to the local bodies for expenditure within the districts whence it was derived. The only fault to be found with this arrangement is that it is a very small proportion. But, such as it is, the Colonial Treasurer has not been able to refrain from making a " grab " for it. Towards the close of the session just concluded, an Amending Act was introduced, by which this portion was to be " coniiaticated ""to the Colonial Treasury. In Committee on the measure, Mr Macandrevr proposed the excision of the obnoxious clause. The division was a very close one,the numbers being 84 c n each side. The Chairman of Committees gave his casting vote against the amendment, and the share of the Land Fund for local works vanished.

It is in close divisions like the one just mentioned that the value of individual votes is seen. On such a question as this we would have thought th~t the Canterbury and Otago members would have stood shoulder to shoulder, and voted so us to retain even this scant measure of justice for their constituents > As a rule they did so, and most pronounced supporters of the Government voted against them on this occasion. But the absolute unanimity which would have secured their end was wanting. Among the Canterbury members, excluding Ministers, there was One dissentient. This vote was sufficiently valuable on this occasion to turn the scale, and condemn the whole of the Canterbury Land Fund to be utilised in making rodds north of Auckland, going on with Taranaki Harbor works, and feeding Te Whiti's fencers.

Some men achieve greatness, others have it thrust upon them, The honorable member for Lyttolton evidently belongs to the latter class. Last session his unaided voice settled who was to represent, or at least sit for, the important constituency of Cliristchurch. We now find him decreeing that the Canterbury local bodies shall bo deprived of the last shred of theirlegitimate inheritance Such heroic conduct should not remain unrecognised, and we cannot do better than assist in emblazoning the honorable gentleman's name on the records of a grateful country by quoting the following from a Southern contemporary, which t'.ius describes his vote under the appropriate heading : — I always voted at my parly's ca!i, And 1 nover thought of thinking for . myself at all. " Mr Alhvright fought as nobly in the House against the conservation of any portion of the Canterbury Land Fund,

as did Mr M'Caughan in the case of Otago. It would be manifestly unfair to Mr Allwright were we to neglect to give his name a (similar prominence to that of Mr M'Caughun, aud therefore we subjoin a list showing the m.ann r in which the Canterbury members voted on the question :— For retaining the 20 per cent. For giving it up. Andrews Ho wen Fisher «» Montgomery ™$ P.loorhouso Samidera ALLWRIGHT Stevens Studhnlino fej Turnbiill **' Wakeiield Wright Further comment is needless, and we have only to impress this fact on the hearts and minds of the unsophisticated people of Lyttelton—that it they neglect to get up a banquet to Mr Allwright tiioy will be acting in a very shabby and ungrateful manner indeed."

We were somewhat surprised to find on Friday last one of our local carriers engaged in collecting tlio lamps from the various lamp posts in the Borough and carting them to the Borough Council Chanib rs. Knowing as we do that a motion is now entered in the Nolico of Motion book to be found on the table in the Borough Council Chamber, and signed by Councillor Bruce to be brought forward to morrow to the effect that the lamps in the Borough should bo lit, we cannot help thinking considerable haste has been shewn in the matter. If Cr Brace's motion is carried, the next job will be to cart the lamps back again, thus entailing two charges- which might easily have been avoided—the removal of the lamps and the return of them. It is very certain that the lamps could not have suffered from a three or four days extra exposure to the weather aeeing they have stood it for over three years. To say the least the step taken looks like a bit of sharp practice and one apparently taken to weaken the cause contained in tlio motion. If it be so tlio procee ling is by no moans creditable to those concerned. We think a fair argument and then a decision by vote to be both the more regular ami preferable plan. The question is by whoso authority has this step been taken.