The Globe. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1878.

Globe, Volume IX, Issue 1236, 19 February 1878, Page 2

The Globe. TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 19, 1878.

It is tlio misfortune of How Zealand to be ruled at the present time by a Premier of whose principles and motives it is difficult to form a just conception. If his conduct did not belie his words, we would imagine that ho is ever burning with an eager desire to forward the interests of the people. Butins actions with regard to the Land Bill, and that of his Ministry in the Proudfoot case, are enough to condemn him in the eyes of all who have any regard for political honor. Another instance of his uuscrupulousncss has come under onr notice. In his address to the citizens of Wellington he refer?; amongst other questions, to tins

relations which subsist between the Mother Country and the Colonies, on which subject he speaks in the following terms:—

There is a party rising in England, holding certain views, and helping to carry out certain views, which would be fatal to the good of this country. They maintain, whether you like it or not, that you are to be taxed by Great Britain for the support of her fleet, and she is to determine how much you are to pay. Such a demand should not he made upon us, and ought to be 'resisted ; and you can only resist such demands successfully by the popular will of the nation. With regard to paying for the British navy, I believe that if Great Britain was in difficulties —if Great Britain wanted ships—there would be no lack on the part of the inhabitants of New Zealand to come forward and magnanimously contribute all sho could to aid in such an emergency; but on the other hand, I say, so long as we have no voice in deciding whether war is to be made by Great Britain, it is sufficient for tis to bear the effects of that war by the loss of our commerce, the cost of defending our coast , the chances of being robbed by privateers, and the results which a great war would indict upon us. If we bear that uncomplaingly, and are willing to thus aid the Empire, then I say it is not right that we should be taxed for the purpose of supporting the navy in Great Britain.

Any one reading the above passage would naturally conclude that we were about to be plunged into an angry dispute with Great Britain on tho question of her right to levy taxes in the colonies for Imperial purposes. We rub our eyes in bewildered astonishment as wo read the Premier’s appeals to the people to resist such demands, and wonder what it all means. The truth is there is no foundation for the assertion whatever. There are, no doubt, some theorists who hold such views, but there is about as much chance of their influencing public opinion, so as to succeed iu reversing the whole colonial policy of Great Britain, as those who hold Republican opinions have of upsetting the British constitution. What Sir G. Grey’s motive can be in raising such a question at all it is impossible to imagine, hut it is difficult to credit him with any patriotic purpose. Then again, his reference to tho cost of defending our coast, is without exception the coolest piece of effrontery we have seen for a long time. Perhaps Sir G. Grey imagines he has been doing something for the defence of our harbors, that he has been urging on the work ever since ho came into power, that he never refused the use of the Hiuemoa to Sir W. Jervois, to report upon our defences, and that he never told the world that wo could not afford to go to the cost of selfdefence. We have evidence that Sir G. Grey is capable of any amount of apparent self deception, but we do not for a moment imagine that he can go so far as to believe that Now Zealand is at any cost in defending her coast at the present time. The whole passage quoted above gives rise to an uneasy feeling that Sir G. Grey is anxious to load this colony into a path of aggltatiou, which, if successful, may be productive of the most fatal consequences.

The Local Board of Health and the City Council have adopted the report drawn up by the joint committees on sanitary matters. The report recommends that the supervision of sanitary matters within the city should he left in the hands of the City Council, the Drainage Board taking such measures as may be necessary to enable the Council to discharge those duties. It is further agreed that the proviso in clause 14 of the Public Health Act should ho repealed. This proviso is that the Drainage Board should be constituted the solo Local Board of Health in the district comprised in the area of the drainage district. If this recommendation is carried out —and it has the sanction of tin Local Board of Health and the City Council —we shall return to the state of things which existed prior to the passing of the Public Health Act, 1866. Sanitary matters will be attended to in Christchurch and utterly neglected in the suburbs. In yesterday’s issue, we urged the necessity of more stringent measures being taken by the Board. Though we dii so, wo do not deny that they have effected a vast amount of good. Numerous disgusting nuisances have been abated, aud a great improvement made in the health of the district; aud were tjie Board to continue in office for some time longer they might see their way to introduce the pan system in every thickly populated neighbourhood. But if we are to return to the state of things which obtained prior to 1866, all hope of this may vanish. Judging from past experience, it is useless to trust to the Road Boards to manage such things. It is not to the interest of the majority of the jnojnbers of suburban Boards to spend large sums in sanitary matters immediately outside the Town bolt. Unless there is some authority other than the Central Board of Health in Wellington to force them to do it, they will simply lot matters alone. This is certainly not a pleasant prospect. The City Council may spend the ratepayers’ money by the thousand in keeping the city clean, their exertions will he utterly wasted, if five separate and independent bodies are left in charge of the health of the suburbs. Of course, when the proviso to clause 14 is repealed, a fresh one may be added. Three courses are open —the Drainage Board may be made the Board of Health fqi? all the district but Christchurch; the Board may be made a Central Board of Health to supervise the local bodies; or an entirely independent Board may bo appointed. The first alternative, it is unnecessary to discuss. The Drainage Board will not consent to look after the suburbs, if they aro deprived of authority iu the city. Nor would the suburbs consent to bo ruled by a body, several of whoso members are elected by Christchurch alone. The next alternative is that the Drainage Board should he appointed a Central Board of Health, with power to see that sanitary matters aro attended to, not only in the city, but also iu the suburbs. This plan might succeed. At any rate, it would ho a great improvement upon a system which left the suburban Road Boards free to do as they liked. Should, however, the Drainage Board refuse to have anything to do with sanitary matters, it is quite plain that some body, on the spot, must bo invested with anthorily over the entire district. We hope the whole question will ho carefully considered before Parliament meets, and that some scheme will be devised which will, while it Hatters the vanity of the members of the local bodies, secure a careful supervision of sanitary mutters in the city and suburbs,