Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

The Evening Star. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1876.

Notwithstanding the time devoted by the House of Representatives to the consideration of the Counties Bill the Legislative Council threatens to render it, to a great extent, inoperative. Whether tho Chairman of a County aits in Parliament or not is of little moment compared with the cramping

effect of limiting the borrowing poire* of the ! County to one year'- revenue. There is such inconsistency between the proposed liberty of Counties and that of Municipalities that the conclusion all must arrive at is that the Legislative Council are not guided in. their decisions by principle or knowledge- "Why should the inhabitants of a town privileged to borrow for carrying out local improvements and the dwellers in a county be doomed to stagnation ? Yet this policy is precisely that which the Council has year by year determined shall be the relative position of town and cmntry. Session after session, in one form or another, Sir Julius Voqel tried to obtain for rural districts powers to raise money for local works on local security; J and every effort, though sanctioned by large majorities in the Lower House was frustrated by the adverse vote of the Upper. To decree that Counties shall not have the ability to carry out necessary public works is virtually to insist upon a centralists system that it has been the persistent effort of the present and past Governments to avoid. I While we consider the attempted agitation in favor of the perpetuation of Provincialism II > have been factious., and oontrary to the best interests of the Colony, we think that nowa determined expression of opinion should be Sfiven against the alterations in the Counties Bill proposed by the Legislative Council. We can scarcely believe it possible that the 'reports of Colonel Whitmore's and Mr Holmes's speeches, published in this morn ing*s 'Daily Times' are correct. The Colonel's is pure nonsense. To say that the House of Representatives being "delegates" does not fairly represent those who have delegated their interests to their keeping is worthy of the logic of a Mrs Harris or Sairey Gamp. It would be an idea to laugh at, were it not in- the head of one who can use it mischievously. But absurd as such a: notion is, it is positively harmless compared with the selfish, class feeling attributed to the Hon. Mr Holmes. If it be true that he objeoted to Counties having borrowing powers because they would then go into public works, keep up the rate of wages, and prevent "flockowners" having their shearing done uuder 20s per 100, it is high time the Council was weeded of Mr Holmes's presence. The very object of the County system—that of facilitating local improvement and furthering settlement-—will be done away with, and for what object? To prevent working men becoming capitalists that "flookowners" may nourish. This would be climbing up on other men's shoulders with a vengeance ? Plainly speaking, it is using the position of membership of the Legislative Council for private profit—not for the general good. We have latterly had so many strange exhibitions of wrongheadedness that we feel no surprise at any extravagance that maybe uttered; but we should have thought such a revelation of barefaced selfishness would never have proceeded out of auy one's mouth : we therefore hope that the telegraph has done Mr Holmes injustice.

Some important papers relative to the San Franoisc4 service, just presented to Parliament, explain the action of Ministers in asking Parliament to at once consent, which tbey have done, to the abandonment of the coastal service, and of the substitution of direct communication between San Francisco and Sydney, in lieu of the "fork" route. President Clyde, of the Pacific Company, writes to their Sydney agents : The situation appeared to bo that a contract had been ente red into for the performance of a service which w s impracticable, aud which appears to bave been so regarded 'by the underwriters and best informed merchants of your colonies, and condemned when it was made by the naval officers and seamen of both your own and our country as unsafe. Mr Clvdk offered as two alternative modifications : Ist of the route, by the omission of the coastal and Fiji services, or 2nd, of the steamers employed, by substituting smaller vessels, suitable for the service, proposed by the first alternative to be omitted. Failing the adoption of one or other alternative, the service to be abandoned. Vice-President Houston says: We are required to furnish a class of. vessels that will not, without great risk, enter harbors at which we ore required to deliver the mails. The Sydney agents (Gilchrist, Watt and Co.) telegraphed:— Uoless matters promptly settled, ships will be withdrawn from the Colonies, as it is better for contractors to pay forfeit than risk their.loss or continue trade manifestly disastrous. And again only a week back : Please grant permission to our moil steamers via Auckland or Bay of Islands, pending approval by Parliament of direct service. Otherwise Pacific Mail Company instruct us to send our mail direct Home to San jFrancisoo, as tbey will not again risk their large vessels on coastal service.

Although much has been said and written in condemnation of the coastal service, we have reason to think that the complaint of the contractors has not been so much against it as against the " fork" route, which necessitated the employment of five boats when three would tw sufficient, compelling as it it did one of the steamers being laid up in Sydney harbor for thirty-seven days. Sooner than continue the fork route, the company intimated in very plain terms their inten tion to abandon the service and forfeit the security they had lodged with the two Governments for the performance of the contract; and to show that they were in earnest they ordered the City of San Francißco to leave Sydney, for Melbourne, en route for the Golden Horn. Our Government has met the wishes of the contractors, and there is every reason to believe, although no speoific information-on the subject has yet reached this Colony, that the .New South Wales Government will do likewise. Whether the City of New York, which takes this month's outward mail from Sydney, will coma down the Coast after traushirping to the Australia at Kandavu is not known; but present appearances are in favor of the supposition that the performance of the coastal service by the big boats ends with this trip of the Australia.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/ESD18761020.2.9

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Evening Star, Issue 4259, 20 October 1876, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,082

The Evening Star. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1876. Evening Star, Issue 4259, 20 October 1876, Page 2

The Evening Star. FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1876. Evening Star, Issue 4259, 20 October 1876, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert