THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1881. CITY COUNCIL WORK.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 228, 2 August 1881, Page 2

THE GLOBE. TUESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1881. CITY COUNCIL WORK.

A considerable amount of very useful business was carried through at the City Council meeting held last night, and the ratepayers will, wo fancy, be well satisfied at the result achieved. The first thing resolved upon was the cancelling of the contract of Mr. A. Duncan for the removal of night soil. Although Mr. Duncan evidently had friends in the Council, yet the case proved against him was too strong, and it was resolved that the contract should again be taken by Mr. Brightling, whose work in days gone by was in striking contrast to the slipshod manner of carrying out the business which has led to the present fiasco. The Council may well be congratulated in standing out for the rights of the public. If contracts are of any use whatsoever they should he strictly enforced, unless the contractor can make oat a clear case of hardship. Some time ago—we are not alluding to the time during which the present Council have been in office—we called attention to the very lax manner in which the Council enforced its contracts, and we stated our conviction that if the public knew the amounts to which contractors have become liable by way of fine, and the amounts they had in reality paid on this account, the contrast between the two sums would somewhat astonish them. The present instance will serve as a [useful lesson to contractors, and we certainly cannot see that anything said on behalf of Mr. Duncan should have weighed when balanced with the overwhelming evidence poured in at the rate of twenty complaints per diem.

The next matter of importance brought under the notice of the Council was the report of the committee to whom the water supply scheme had been referred. It will bo remembered that a fortnight ago the scheme brought down by the Water Supply Committee for a modified system of supply to cost £13,440, was referred to the Finance and Water Supply Committees to take legal advice re the financial aspect of the scheme. These committees have now unanimously recommended the project to the Council for adoption, and they have advised the Council to apply to the ratepayers in terms of the Municipal Corporations Act for the necessary authority to borrow the money on debentures, extending over a period of thirty or fifty years. It is recommended that £20,800 be obtained on the clear understanding that only so much will he borrowed as will complete the present proposal, the balance to be ex-

pended in extending the scheme, and then only at the request of the ratepayers. We trust the ratepayers will justify the confidence expressed by the committee that they will cordially approve of the plan submitted, and that, doing so, they will be prepared to undertake the financial responsibilities connected with the scheme, for we think it will be generally agreed that it would he most undesirable to hand the scheme over to a company. If the scheme were a speculative one, the matter would bo different. In the matter of tramways, for instance, the success of the undertaking was not assured, and the City Council could never have asked the ratepayers to run tho risk of a failure. But in the present instance the value to ho received is nearly assured, tho ratepayers benefiting both directly and indirectly—directly by tho income accruing, indirectly by a lessening of insurance premiums and by a lessened cost in flushing the side channels. Besides, the probability of a large extension of the scheme at no very distant date renders it fill the more necessary that the control of the affair should be kept in the hands of the Council. Questions of municipal policy are not apt to weigh with companies, and tho Council might be hampered when it was least desirable that they should be so.

The third matter brought before the Council last night to which we would wish to refer is the motion of the Mayor as to the setting down and taking up of the tramway passengers. Tho Mayor’s proposal is to grant to the Tramway Company the privilege of extending their lines round the Square to the westward, and to make a standing-place outside tho kerb at the hack of the Godley statue. The matter was referred to the Tramway Committee, to report on to the next meeting of the Council. It would certainly seem that the public convenience would he studied if the proposal were carried into effect. There is no doubt that the present arrangement is both dangerous and inconvenient. Besides, were the standing-place taken out of the direct route through the Square, the traffic would be much eased. At present there are generally one or two cars standing in the middle of the road, and carriages sometimes find it difficult to pass. With a covered landing place at the back of tho statue the public would have nothing to complain of. As to the proposal to shift the Godley statue it is not at once apparent that it would be necessary. Wo are confident, however, that the shade of Mr. Godley would he perfectly ready to bow to the will of the majority of the citizens. Mr. Godley, when in the flesh, was noted for his tact. He initiated the “ heroic work of civilisation,” and, just when his paternal influence would have hampered rather than assisted the rising colony, he left it to its own devices and transferred his abilities to a sphere where they could be more usefully employed in watching over the welfare of his protege from a distance. Being so considerate in great things, he would be little likely to be inconsiderate in small ones. The moving of the statue is not an apparent necessity, but the possibility of the removal need not, we think, weigh much in the scale, when the public convenience is to bo considered, There are other sites where the statue would look remarkably well.