THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1882. THE PLACING OF SEWAGE IN THE DRAINS.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2632, 13 September 1882, Page 2

THE GLOBE. WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 13, 1882. THE PLACING OF SEWAGE IN THE DRAINS.

The action of the Drainage Board with regard to the granting permission for water-closet connections with tho main sewers must have taken everybody by surprise. No more barefaced or impudent disregard of everything a public body should hold binding has ever been manifested in Christchurch. Let ns briefly recapitulate the facts, and then our readers will see that the strong language we have used in connection with the action of the Board in this matter is fully justified. The old Board, as will be remembered, went out of office, or, to speak more correctly, declined to take office again on this very point. Mr. Hobbs, one of the most prominent members of the Board in connection with this matter, was, it will be remembered, most unfairly made exceedingly unpopular because he advocated the cause of placing excreta in the sewers. The new Board came in distinctly, though not expressed in so many words, on the opposition ticket. The public having so emphatically recorded its opinion just prior to the election against the proposal, the members of the new Board must be taken to have held views at that time in consonance with those of the majority of their constituents. If they had been in favor of placing the excreta in the sewers, it is only reasonable to suppose that they would hava stood little or no chance of election. Thus we have arrived at our first point, viz.—that tho Board were elected ostensibly, though not perhaps expressly, as a Board opposed to the placing of excreta in (he sewers. Our second point is that the voice of the people having been so clearly and emphatically given against the proposal, the Board has forfeited tho least ray of consistency they might have possessed by agreeing to do that which the majority of their constituents condemned, We can

ill remember the meetings held, not alone n the centre but in the out districts, at which the proposal was emphatically rejected and measures taken to oppose it. The fiery eloquence of our good sld friend Mr. Oliivior, who went forth like a modern crusader inveighing against the evils of the proposed scheme, must live in the memories of many. At the time the old Board professed to ignore these manifestations of public opinion. Secure in their seats for a period, they practically defied public opinion. But when the period came for the election of a new Board, was there one of them whodared seek re-election who had been found advocating the placing of excreta in the sowers ? Not a single solitary one. All recoiled from meeting the public face to face and giving an account of their stewardship, more particularly the reasons that had led them persistently to defy and disregard the voice of the majority of the ratepayers. Thus the most ardent supporter of the proposal to place excreta in the sewers cannot deny that the public voice has always been and is still opposed to the very scheme which the present Board has so complacently and quietly adopted. This admitted then, the truth of our proposition cannot be denied, viz., that the Board has adopted that which is entirely and completely opposed to the opinions of the bulk of those whom they are supposed to represent. This in a body elected without being, to a certain extent, pledged hy former action of their constituents to a totally different line of policy, would have been bad enough, but when such a course of action is taken by gentlemen who decidedly went in on the non-sewage ticket, it amounts to a most glaring and flagrant abuse of the trust confided to them. Yet another point. Despite these overwhelming expressions on the part of the public, these very members press on a measure intended to give them power to carry out this

very scheme. This Bill is rejected by the Parliament of the country, influenced no doubt fay the numerous petitions sent to Wellington against it. Tet a day or so after the rejection of one of the cardinal points in their policy, viz., the obtaining legislative sanction for what they were about to do, they actually carry a resolution affirming the desirability of bringing a scheme into operation, power to do which has been refused alike by the people and the Parliament. Jf the Board were able without the Bill projected to carry out the scheme of water closetjconnections, why need they incur the very heavy expense of promoting a Bill for the purpose? We confess we are unable to understand how any public body elected by the people can so wilfully and completely disregard the opinions of those they are supposed to represent. It certainly is most marvellous that no notice appears to have been taken of the step; no protest is made except in one instance. That came from Mr. Dunbar, the newly elected member for the Heathcote district. But he did not object on the broad general ground of the opposition of a majority of the ratepayers. His vote was recorded against the resolution because he was of opinion that the depositing the sewage of Christchurch on the Sandhills would prejudicially affect the health of his district. But not a word was said by anyone as to the almost unanimous vote of the public only a few months back. No one ventured to raise his voice against a proposition which had been condemned most thoroughly by all the meetings held. Yet these men were the popular representatives who were to replace those who refused to carry out the will of their masters— i.e., the ratepayers. How far this has been carried out onr readers will be able to judge from the facts we have laid before them. Wo should not have been surprised had such a state of things occurred in that select little family circle, the Board of Governors of the Canterbury College. There the public is entirely ignored, and one expects to find rabid conservatism and dislike to the common herd rampant amongst those who consider themselves the salt of the earth. They have never undergone the indignity of asking a common shopkeeper or any other vulgar person engaged in trade for their vote. They owe their position to family influences, money, and, above all, blood. But the members of the Drainage Board are mere ordinary mortals, dependent on the breath of popular favour for the seats they hold. That being so, wa leave them to the tender mercies of their constituents, after the facts we have put before them, and, as the old law formula runs, “ may heaven send them a good deliverance.”