The Globe. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1876.

Globe, Volume VII, Issue 710, 28 September 1876, Page 2

The Globe. THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 28, 1876.

The time is fast approaching when the citizens of Christchurch will have to choose their Mayor for the ensuing year. In some recent articles, we endeavoured to impress upon the ratepayers the necessity of exercising great discretion in their choice of representatives in the Council. We are glad to note that the representatives returned at the recent election were such as to do credit to the city. But if this was necessary in regard to the election of City Councillors, it becomes infinitely more so when applied to that of Mayor. The tone of any body, particularly a public one, depends very much upon the character and worth, added to ability of its chairmen. In regard to the City Council this applies with double force, because, not only is the Mayor chairman of the representatives of the ratepayers, but he is also head of the city. He is the means of communication with the Government, and upon his tact and ability in many ways, depends the prosperity of the municipality over which he presides. He needs to be a man of not alone administrative, but, if we may use the words, suggestive capacity. Brom him must come, in a great measure, ideas and suggestions as to the work of the Council. In fact he must, if his administration is to be a success, not only be the presiding officer, but the leader of that body. It will therefore be seen that to rightly fulfil the many and onerous duties devolving upon him, the Mayor of a rising city like Christchurch should be a man of business habits and ability. The citizens in whose hands the selection of such, a one rests should therefore weigh well the claims of the candidates who are likely to come forward for their suffrages. We must confess that we do not altogether agree with the principle of the citizens electing the Mayor. It seems to us that the members of the Council from their close and intimate knowledge of the capability of those working with them would be far better able to select a Mayor from amongst their own body than the citizens. In the latter in- j stance the probability is that a candi- ! Me is elected for reasons quite outside his fith^ 0, predilections and other argumeiT* B “V h , !WI S reater weight than fitness i.T 01 n°nnecwith the affairs of the muu. lol^1 While saying this, however, we mUbV not be understood to favour in the smallest degree the very absurd custom, of the Mayoral office going by seniority hitherto carried out. Under this the most unfit person, unless ‘his own common sense induced him to decline, must perforce be elected. This, it appears to us, was decidedly a mistake.. If the election, untrammelled by ally quasi understanding of this kind, had been left in the hands of the Councillors, we could very well have afforded to have done without the election being put in the hands of the burgesses. We would ask, even now, whether the ratepayers can go outside the Council to elect a Mayor ? The first election under the new arrangement resulted in a confirmation of the Council’s choice, and no better selection could have been made. We confess we cannot see the advantages of the present system ; indeed, with the setting aside of the remarkable arrangement we have referred to, the old one would work far better. We have now a Council in which the ratepayers have implicit confidence; it is composed of some of the best men obtainable. They are thoroughly posted up in municipal matters, and have shown themselves capable of dealing with the various subjects coming before them in an intelligent manner. Therefore, without wishing in any way to circumscribe the choice of the ratepayers, we conceive that it would be for the best interests of the city if the selection were made from amongst the members I of the City Qomih