THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1882. THE LICENSING COMMITTEE ELECTION.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2456, 18 February 1882, Page 2

THE GLOBE. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 1882. THE LICENSING COMMITTEE ELECTION.

The first election under the new Licensing Act is complete, and the result has already been made known. It must, we think, bo matter for general regret that the temperance advocates were so illadvised as to bring forward Archdeacon. Harris, and to place him in what cannot but he regarded, under (he circumstances, as a somewhat humiliating position. He was nominated as the joint choice of the Licensed Victuallers and the temperance advoea.es, and special stress was laid by our contemporary the “Star ” upon his not feeing thrown in as a compromise. While saying this, there can fee no doubt that the rejection of Archdeacon Harris is due entirely to a question of principle, and not in any way as a reflection upon him. He is held deservedly in high esteem here, both as a citizen and a clergyman, and were in not that a question of principle of very largo social importance is'involved, we should have welcomed his election to the committee most heartily. But the objection we have urged, an objection which, judging from the result of the polling, islargely shared by the ratepayers, is that the clergy have no right to mix themselves up with business or this character;: that, in fact, their time and talents shonld he exclusively devoted to the work for which they have been specially set apart. We trust that the nominators of Archdeacon Harris, or that gentleman himself, will recognise the fact that, viewed from the standpoint of principle,his nomination is a mistake, and will withdraw his candidature from the other districts. In the gentlemen elected for the North District the ratepayers have a thoroughly good committee, one in whose impartiality and care in administering the law they can have the utmost confidence. Why then should it be necessary to subject a highly respected citizen and a clergyman to the indignity of further rejection ? There appears to be a pretty general agreement as to the undesirableness of clergymen acting as members of the licensing committees; and this being so it would be far better for the temperance party to take the course we have suggested, and withdraw the Archdeacon from further candidature. In doing so there will he, we desire to point out, nothing at all derogatory to either Archdeacon Harris or his supporters. It will merely be a deference to public opinion, as expressed most emphatically in the election of yesterday. THE REGULATION OF DAIRIES-

The opinion wa formed at the time of the proclamation being issued granting certain powers to the Local Board of Health with regard to the inspection of dairies is more than confirmed by the proposed regulations recently brought up by a committee of the Board. As will bo remembered, we took the objection to the proposal that the inspector should of necessity be a medical man. Now that the subject has been discussed by the Local Board of Health they too seem to believe that this will be a very great expense. There are about eighty dairies in Christchurch and its suburbs within a radius of twelve miles, everyone of which, if the scheme of inspection is to be of any practical use, must be personally inspected by the medical officer at frequent intervals. Where, as will be the result in the present case, the officer so appointed has not only his private practice to attend to, but also the onerons duties of the medical officer of health for a large district, it becomes a very serious matter. Either some of these multifarious occupations must be neglected or dropped entirely. In the latter case the salary to be paid for the work must be commensurate with the sacrifice asked to be made. Now, whilst we quite agree with those who think that the inspection of milk and dairies is a most important matter, we think the public will hesitate before agreeing to a scheme which will cost a very large annual sum. The provision as to the inspector being a medical man is, as wo before contended, quite unnecessary. Any ordinary inspector of nuisances is perfectly competent to detect a state of things which is likely to contaminate milk, supposing it to exist on the premises of any of these eighty dairymen. It is universally admitted that the most careful and scientific tests are powerless to discover whether milk contains the germs of any infections disease ; why then the necessity of a highly paid expert as inspector ? The causes of disease germs being absorbed by milk, and afterwards disseminated, is neither more nor less than want of cleanliness and a disregard of the commonest sanitary requirements which the Inspector of Nuisances is in the habit of discovering and reporting upon every day of his life. Stagnant pools of water upon or near a dairy farm to which the cattle have access; proximity of cesspools to the dairy, foul drains, and the other plainly discoverable breaches of sanitary laws are the factors which produce unwholesome milk. Does it, wo ask, require a duly qualified medical practitioner to discover the whereabouts of a highly perfumed drain, or to report that it is in toe close proximity to a dairy ? One’s common sense at once supplies a negative answer; yet here we Lave a provision that none elso shall be appointed, and his duties are such—if he discharges them properly—as very n.early to occupy his whole time in the service of the Board for this particular portion of the work. This, we cannot help thinking, tho Board will, on reflection, consider as paying too dearly for their whistle. There may be cases in which, perhaps, a reference will have to be made to medical authority, but these, we conceive, will be but few and far between, and the Board always have their Officer of Health to whom they can refer any case of exceptional difficulty with which tho ordinary inspector may not he quite competent to deal. As wo have said, the work is of no use whatever unless thoroughly and systematically done. M ire perfunctory examinations of dairies, hurried and flying visits at stated times, will be utterly useless as an effectual protection against tho communication of disease through milk. What is wanted is a searching boose to boose

visitation of the dairies to ascertain whether the sanitary arrangements are such as to ensure cleanliness and health in the cattle. This, we contend, can bo very well performed by an ordinary inspector, without the necessity of appointing a highly paid expert. We trust that the Board will pause before they commit the ratepayers to what may become a very large and increasing annual expenditure. They have not, it seems to us, discussed the question from this point of view, and, if so, the sooner they do it the better, THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE BOARD OF HEALTH. The old adage as to the sweeping propensities of new brooms appears to he receiving fall exemplification in connection with the new Board of Health. Dr.

Doyle, one of the newly-elected members, with a courage which is beyond praise, has notified his intention of moving that the Board revoke the delegation of its powers as a Local Board of Health to the City Council so far as the city of Christchurch is concerned. Surely Dr. Doyle is not aware of the many struggles made by the City Council to obtain these coveted powers. Not that the old Board of Health were averse to the granting of them; on the contrary, they were exceodingly glad to ho relieved of the responsibility. But the Board of Health stood upon its dignity, and, like the coy maiden —“ Towing she would ne’er consent, consented”—gave way only after a great deal of persuasion. It is not therefore likely that the Council will quietly consent to yield np what cost so much trouble to obtain, nor do we see that any necessity exists for a change. Sanitary matters in the city under the regime of the City Fathers have been fairly well attended to; far better, by the way, than when under the control of the Board of Health; why, therefore, should a daring innovator, like Dr. Doyle, seek to interfere with the present state of things ? His only complaint seems to be that the City Inspector does not report to the Health Officer, hut to the City Council. Well, that is a matter easily remedied, and, if this is the only reason Dr. Doyle has to urge why the present system should be interfered with, we do not think he has any very good grounds to go upon for his motion. An attempt on the part of the Board to resume its delegated powers is certain to provoke the City Council to fight the surrender of them inch by inch, and we cannot but think that, under the circumstances, this would be very undesirable. If the City Council in its administration of the sanitary affairs of the portion of the district committed to its charge had blundered most egregionsly, thereby endangering the health and probably the lives of the citizens, then indeed the Board would have sufficient grounds to at once revoke its delegation. But nothing of the kind is alleged for one moment. The head and front of their offending appears to be but a very trivial breach of etiquette, which no doubt will bo remedied in fatnre. This being so, the best counsel we can give to Dt. Doyle and the Board is to let well alone.