THE GLOBE. SATURDAY. FEBRUARY 25, 1882. THE WATER SUPPLY QUESTION.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2462, 25 February 1882, Page 2

THE GLOBE. SATURDAY. FEBRUARY 25, 1882. THE WATER SUPPLY QUESTION.

Cotjncileoe Htjlbeet deserves very great credit for his pertinacity in advocating the pushing forward to a practical issue the project for an improved water supply for Christchurch. He has succeeded, hy dint of perseverance, in achieving the first portion of his task, viz., obtaining the remittal to the water supply committee appointed hy the Council of the subject of a scheme. This, of course, when compared with the afterwork, may be considered but a trifle. Probably it is in itself, but there is a much larger significance in it than at first sight appears. It seems to us to prove most conclusively that the time has arrived when something must be done, because the representatives of the citizens, a body which has had before it time after time all the information on the subject, knowing also the danger which exists in case of fire to the major part of the city, have concluded, despite the rejection of the citizens, that it is in the interest of the city as a whole to lose no time in obtaininga water supply. To our mind, no stronger or more conclusive evidence of the wisdom of accepting a well considered, scheme could be given. On the one hand we have the deliberate opinion of those in the best position to judge of the necessity which exists, and on the other, the blind unreasoning vote of persons influenced and swayed only by the statements of those who have shown themselves the enemies of progress, scaring the ratepayers by the delusive cry of “ More taxation.” There can be no doubt that a small additional rate will have to be paid, but though this is so, in reality a very large saving to the pockets of every individual ratepayer, far exceeding the small disbursement in the shape of rates, will accrue. Increased comfort and convenience in the use of the water for household purposes, a reduction of premiums now paid for fire insurance by a considerable percentage, and increased security for life and property, are some of the advantages to be reaped by the citizens in the possession of an efficient water supply. As to economy, let us take but two items of cost under the present system, viz., the watering of the streets and flushing those side channels which, from want of fall, are unable to be done any other way than by the watercarts. How last year the cost of watering the streets, defrayed, be it remembered, by only a small portion of the citizens, and for a most inefficient service, was £613. The rate, lid in the £, is just what it was estimated it would require to give Christchurch a very efficient water supply for fire prevention and in part household purposes. Those who have shops on the thoroughfares visited by the water-carts well know how utterly inefficient and worse than useless is the so-called watering the streets, for which they are mulcted lid in the £. For the same rate, according to the scheme rejected, they would get a service which would be of use even during the wosrt nor’-west weather, and into the bargain a supply for fire prevention purposes far excelling that we now possess. But in addition to this sum to which we have referred, the flushing of the side channels by means of water carts cost the city last year no less a sum than £'227, which would, as in the case of the street watering, bo saved by a scheme for a water supply. Those who live in parts of the city whore the side channels have to bo flushed by the water-carts know how miserably inefficient the system is. Yet the ratepayers cheerfully submit to a charge annually of £227 on this account alone, but refuse to allow themselves to bo rated at a far less amount to got a scheme possessing all the advantages we have pointed out. Wo are utterly at a loss to account for such stupidity—for there is no other milder word suitable — on the part of the citizens. If they would only take the trouble to think for themselves instead of being led by the noso by popular agitators, they would at onco see the fallacy of the argument that an increased water supply means increased taxation. Wo are prepared to prove that the ratepayers now pay a far larger sum yearly than they would do with a scheme of water supply, and they

git nothing in return. Leaving out the question of a return by means of utilising the water as a motor for manufacturing or other purposes, the citizens would not pay more annually for a good scheme than they do now. On the question of revenue from the sale of water there is much to be said. The figures quoted by Councillor Hulbert with respect to the Oamarn waterworks speak for themselves. They show that in a comparatively small town like Oamaru the revenue from this source, even in the infancy, as it were, of the water supply scheme, reached £ISOO per annum. Surely in Christchurch, with its large and increasing population, its manufactories of all kinds growing in extent and numbers, it would not bo beyond the mark to put the revenue derivable from the sale of water at doable that in Oamaru. Taking this not unfair basis, we then get £3OOO per annum as the revenue likely to arise from this source. Water, it must be remembered, is the cheapest of all motors, requiring no expensive fittings, and capable of being utilised for any purpose. Once let us get a scheme enabling the City Council to provide this power, and it will be eagerly applied for. In Oamaru the number of applicants for water power have been so numerous that the Council is debating the enlargement of their works to meet the demand. Lot our ratepayers ponder over these facts, and consider well what they now pay for a most inadequate return. It is time that the citizens as a whole bestired themselves. In the last appeal on the water question those who should have been on the side of progress exhibited an apathy which, in a great degree, contributed to the result. What must be done is, for those who have tho true interests of tho city at heart, to band themselves together to support a wellconsidered and economical scheme of water supply, meeting Mr. Samuel Clarkson and his friends on their own ground, and showing how fallacious and untrue their statements are. If this is done, and care taken to put fully before the people tho advantages to be derived, we have no fear of the result. In the meantime, Councillor Hulbert is certainly en. titled to tho warmest thanks of all good citizens for his indefatigable labors in the cause, labors which, we trust, ere long will be crowned with well deserved success.