The Feilding Star. SATURDAY, NOV. 22, 1882. COUNTIES v HIGHWAY BOARDS

Feilding Star, Volume III, Issue 46, 25 November 1882, Page 2

The Feilding Star. SATURDAY, NOV. 22, 1882. COUNTIES v HIGHWAY BOARDS

When the County system was first established under the Act of] 876, a general impression prevailed in North Manawatu that it was a cumbrous and expensive mode of doing that which the Road Boards were at least equally qualified to do. In the Manawatu County Council an attempt was made, if we remember rightly, to suspend the Counties Act, under the powers given in that respect to County Councils, but was deferred, as the southern members holding the majority voted lor bringing the Act into force. Once brought into force under the Act o£ 187G, there was no power given to suspend, and the only thing left was to make the best of what many feared would be a bad bargain. This feeling was perhaps intensified amongst the northern members by the fact that though inferior in population and rating, the southern districts had obtained a majority in the Council which its resources did not justify. As evidence of the existence of this feeling Palmerston formed itself into a Borough, while Manchester and Kiwitea went in for, and failed to obtain, separation. The dual system was from time to time complained of, but as the only means of getting rid of it under the law as it stood before last session was by merging the Road Boards, the ratepayers appeared to prefer holding on to the older form of local government, even at the cost of bearing the burden of the County system in addition ; and sundry attempts to merge Eoad Boards met with failure. The position is now changed. The Act of 1882 provides for either the continuance of the dual system or the merging of Roard Boards, in the suspension of the Counties Act, and the time appears to have come when the ratepayers should have an opportunity of making the choice between the three modes of local government. In a large and scattered County like the Manawatu some difficulty exists in ascertaining the wishes of the ratepayers on such a subject before proceeding to take a petition round for the signatures of three fiths of the County electors as required by the Act of 1882. We think, however, that the excellent suggestion thrown out by our contemporary, the Manawatu Times, in a recent issue might well be adopted as a preliminary step. Let th« Manawatu Highway Board, as the oldest local body in the County, invite all members of the local bodies throughout Manawatu to attend a conference held, say, in Palmerston, as a central place, and let the matter be there discussed by the various representatives. If a decision be arrived at either to do away with one or other of the local governments at present existing, it would then be the duty of each local body to call a public meeting in its own district, and lay the whole matter before the ratepayers preparatory to circulating a petition for signature. If the merits and demerits of the case were thus explained, much preliminary difficulty would be got over, and to some extent the feelings of the majority of the County electors ascertained — a most important foundation to be laid before any further action is taken.