THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 29, 1881. MUSEUM VERSUS PUBLIC LIBRARY.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2259, 29 June 1881, Page 2

THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, JUNE 29, 1881. MUSEUM VERSUS PUBLIC LIBRARY.

If there is one thing more than another upon which Canterbury people pride themselves, it is the Museum. That this should bo so is very natural, because as an institution it is highly creditable to so young a community. No doubt also a good deal could be said in its favor as an educational agent. Therefore it is with some degree of self-glorification that we introduce the typical stranger to the Museum, and ask him, as report says the Sydney people do about their harbour, “ What do you think of that ? ” But we have also other institutions, which, though perhaps not so imposing in appearance as the Museum, are yet doing good work in the education and cultivation of our people. Prominent amongst these is the Public Library, which is a great boon to a large section of the public who are, wo venture to think, educated and refined quite as much as others may be by the Museum. It was, therefore, with considerable surprise—a surprise shared, wo feel certain, by the public generally—that wo noticed the remarks made by Dr. Turnbull at the recent meeting of the Board of College Governors, on which occasion ho is reported to have said that he was quite sure funds belonging to the Library had been diverted to the Museum. The gentleman making this statement did so evidently, as Friday says in “ Robinson Crusoe,” having a knowledge of these things, and we are surprised to find that no notice whatever was taken of it. If it be true that funds belonging to the Public Library, which should go towards rendering it more extensively beneficial to the general public, have been taken to still further enrich what is now quite sufficiently endowed, then wo say that—morally of course—a fraud has been committed on the public. Already, as wo pointed out in a former article, the usefulness of the Public Library has boon crippled and confined by what we cannot but call a most uncalled-for and unwise increase of the fees. This stop has caused many of the very class whom such an institution is intended to benefit to forego what certainly to them might be the moans of, not only amusement, but valuable instruction. The tendency appears to be towards making the institution a circulating library for the well-to-do class; which would be, if carried out, a direct perversion of its objects. It may bo that had these spoliations to enrich the Museum been discovered and checked, that the Board of Governors would not have had even that most shadowy of pretences, want of revenue, to sustain them in their increase of fees. Now that the subject has been ventilated, we hope it will not be allowed to drop, but that inquiry may bo made to see to what extent the Public Library has suffered. Of course Dr. Turnbull would not make such a positive statement as ho has done | unless he was perfectly sure that he is correct. It must bo borne in mind that there is no inference drawn; the statement is distinct and positive that he is certain. The public who are very largely interested in and connected with the Library—have a right to demand that an investigation shall take place, and any sums found to have been wrongfully paid over to the Museum restored to the proper recipient, viz., the Public Library. THE DRAINAGE BILL.

One more chance to act in accord with their constituents was afforded on Monday last to the Drainage Board, which, however, by the extremely narrow majority of one they declined to accept. They have now decided to send the Bill—with their consent to its being divested of the only reason why it was brought forward — to the Canterbury members. Now, if the Drainage Board think these gentlemen, knowing what they do of public opinion hero, are going to bo foolish enough to take up the Bill, they are very much mistaken. It is a very good dodge to attempt to shift the responsibility on to the members from the Board ; but if we know the honourable gentlemen, they are not likely to allow themselves to be made the catspaw on this occasioK. The Drainage Board will say, “ Oh, wo submitted the question to the members as to whether the Bill should bo introduced; they are responsible.” It is really time that the farce which is being enacted with regard to this Bill—which, by the way, will cost a few pounds to the ratepayers —was played out. The ratepayers have distinctly and decidedly said that they will not have the Bill. Mr. Hobbs says that they are ignorant, and know nothing at all about the matter, while Mr. Ross still contends for his principle, though if the excreta [clauses are out it would puzzle him and the Board to find a rag. Why should this Board, professedly representing the ratepayers, still persist in endeavoring to got a measure promoted against which their constituents have over and over again most emphatically protested ? They know as well as wo do that the Bill would never pass even if introduced, and they ought to give the Christchurch members credit for more sense than to expect them to try to introduce it. Whore, then, is the use of their spending the money of the ratepayers P Why don’t they stand up like men and say, “ Well, gentlemen, it is your wish that the Bill should bo withdrawn, and wo bow to your decision ?” That would bo a proper course to adopt. The one now being pursued is nothing but pure egotism and dogged obstinacy on the part of some of the members.