COUNTY BALANCE-SHEET.

King Country Chronicle, Volume VI, Issue 477, 26 June 1912, Page 5

COUNTY BALANCE-SHEET.

To the Editor. Sir, —In your isg'ue of the 22nd May I noticed the report of the special meeting of the ! Waitomo County Council to consider the balance-sheet of 911-12. As no one seems to be going to criticise the above, and silence usually means approval, I think I will just touch on a few points that may be of interest to ratepayers. I noticed that th 9 general rates amounted to £2115, and though ratepayers out back see very little of the latter, they, at least have the satisfaction of knowing that they are providing the machinery to handle such sums as thirds, Government grants, and loans, so their loss is somebody's gain. It is also gratifying to note that the natives are coming into line, and paying their rates, but it seems strange that the above council should vote the clerk the sum of £25 by way of bonus to recoup him for the expense he had been put to in connection with this matter. I fail to see why he should be put to any personal expense, and I question whether the council can afford to be generous. I notice also that our dogs have contributed the noble sum of £67 7s 6d, but whether this amount is clear profit after deducting collars, collecting, etc., is not stated, this question could stand a little ventilation. I believe that about January Ist, 1911, the council notified all owners of dogs through the King Country Chronicle that the registration fee for sheep and cattle dogs would b9 2s 6d up till the end of March, of the same year, all dogs not registered by that date, would be charged double from that date until January Ist, 1912. Now, quite a number of owners of dogs seeing the above, paid their tax at once; others, myself included, not seeing the above, paid double; viz., Os the dog, and auite a number never paid, and' were not asked to pay. The question suggests itself : why a dog tax at all? Is it a money-making concern, or is t'ne object to keep down the number of dogs? If the latter, 1 may state that there are few settlers who keep more dogs than they actually need; then why tax these dogs when the country is ever run with natives' doss which pay no taxes at all? When above subjects, I may as well deal with a notice now in the Chronicle to the effect that defaulters' lists and electors' rolls for the various ridings can be seen at, their respective post offices. The notice states that those relating to Faemako riding can be seen at To Kuiti, but I take it that this is a mistake, as they have been on view at Paeuia .o in the past. Now. sir, Paemako post office is at the extreme end of this electorate, and quite a number of ratepayers in the riding have never seen the place. Why not, therefore, place these lists and rolls st Pio Pio, which is the natural centre of the riding? Touching upon the, above, why is it that there are so few names on the rolls in comparison to the number of ratepayers. I think a county like this, where something like £20,000 is being handled in the year, that every ratepayer should see that his name is on the roll. I don't know if all the ridings are like Paemako. If so, I would like to know how many ratepayers there are in the whole county, and how many were on the r.il! last November? Ido not want to auarrel with the Waitomo County Council, who are trying to do what they believe to be tha best, but it does not always follow that what a council considers to bethe best is the beat,hence the above remarks,but I would like it to be clearly understood that, as a ratepayer, I, for one, do not approve , of all the methods adopted by the above council. —I am, etc., R. LIVINGSTON.