The Evening Star TUESDAY, APRIL 14, 1874

Evening Star, Issue 3476, 14 April 1874, Page 2

The Evening Star TUESDAY, APRIL 14, 1874

Two courses are open to the inhabitants of Dunedin as to the extension of water supply to the outlying districts : to sanction the extension of the powers of the Dunedin Waterworks Company, or to obtain powers to construct new works for the purpose by the Corporation. It is purely an economic question, and should be calmly and quietly discussed, without reference to past proceedings, and without, in any degree, allowing the question of individual profit to enter into it. Everyone who is a shareholder in a company invests for the purpose of realising as much as he can obtain from its operations ; and every director is bound to take measures to render the under-

taking a profitable investment. They may be the wolves of Mr Barton’s story so far as the public are concerned ; but in the eyes of the shareholders they are the watchdogs. No public blame, therefore, ought to be cast upon the Company, so long as they act fairly

and honorably towards those from whom their income is derived. But while the public are bound to fulfil obligations deliberately acceded to, in order to obtain the blessing of a water supply, it becomes a very serious consideration whether, having experience to guide them, they should extend the privileges that are proved to be so costly. They are bound not to disturb conditions entered into between themselves and the Company ; but when an extension of those conditions isintended to be asked for, they have a fair right to ask, what equivalent are you prepared to offer 1 We, the public, have agreed to terms which have proved exceedingly profitable to you, the Com-

pany : we see now we made an unwise bargain, but we thought it to our advantage at the time: you can hardly expect us to agree to add to your already handsome profit, when we, by the construction of works, can reap it ourselves- You have shown us that you consider your shares are more than double the value of your original investment: why should we give in addition what would prove equally profitable to ourselves? This seems to be one view of the money aspect of the matter; but it is not all that is to be considered. It must be evident that we are not contemplating two rival systems of water supply, but two, each of which is to occupy different ground: the present Company fulfilling their original undertaking and new waterworks going beyond their boundaries. The reply to this might be that considerable saving would be effected

by having all under one management ’ by having one reservoir, one pipe track, and one set of mains. And this is unquestionably true; but who are to reap the profit of the saving—the Company or the public ? So far as we are aware the Company do not proffer any equivalent for the additional privileges they ask, and one important question is, should those extended powers be granted, will they be able even to fulfil what they have undertaken to do ? Is the supply now available through their works equal to the increased de mand that will accrue ? This is a serious consideration with the public that must not be lost sight of. There is now a perceptible difference between the pressure during the day, when large consumption of water is going on, and in the evening, when the active business of life is closed. Every additional house built reduces the average,

and the Company should be prepared to show that they will be able to meet the probable extra quantity required when all the streets included in their contract are built up, and the houses are occupied, before asking to be allowed to extend their operations. We do not think the public should have been kept so long in the dark concerning the powers intended to be asked for. It savors too much of the course of policy adopted by the “ shrewd men of business” who are on the directory. We may be- told that it would not do for them to show their caids, otherwise they might lose the trick. But such an argument analysed means, “ Our interests are not those of the public : we have got a good hand, and we

will win the game by keeping them in the dark until everything is secured; they are now trusting' to their watch-dogs, the Corporation 1 and the Press : if we can only keep them silent the game is ours, and

our opponents, the public, will have to pay the price of their sleepiness.” We do not think this fair. It may be a profitable game, but it is not the style of thing that would be tolerated in private transactions. It is too much like what in law is termed “ sharp practice” to.be approved by the instinctive sense of honor of mankind. In what we have said we feel we may be fighting with a shadow, for the Bill to be applied ibr has not been made public. For what we know to the contrary it may be of the most liberal character. It may propose to reduce the water rate in consideration of extended

powers; it may propose to give a free and full supply to public baths, washhouses, hospitals, drinking troughs, and market fountains; it may propose to lay down filter beds, so that nothing but the purest and most health-giving water shall enter the stomachs of the people j so pure may they propose to render it that no one may find an excuse for polluting it with spirits to render it wholesome, and thus teetotallers and Good Templars maybe strengthened in all good thoughts and purposes. But then, on the other hand, it may not j and that no such liberality is proposed may be fairly questioned, because the public have been kept in the dark. When such secrecy is observed as has been evinced in the preparation of the proposed Bill, we cannot forget why it is said men love darkness rather than light. When privileges are asked that so deeply concern every man, woman, and child in and about Dunedin, we think it only fair that the public, as one party to the contract, should be consulted otherwise than through their representatives, who will be fairly entitled to oppose any measure not sanctioned by their constituents.