The Standard. (PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY, AND SATURDAY.) SATURDAY, JANUARY 31, 1874.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume II, Issue 129, 31 January 1874, Page 2

The Standard. (PUBLISHED EVERY TUESDAY, THURSDAY, AND SATURDAY.)

SATURDAY, JANUARY 31, 1874.

“ We shall sell to no man justice or right: We shall deny to no man justice or right: We shall defer to no man justice or right.’’

The Auckland Protection League so long ago as the beginning of December, moved a resolution on a subject which interests the settlers of this district very largely : that is, the present state of the Highway’s Act in general, and the desirability of amending the law relative to fences in particular. Mr. Woolfield moved “ That “ a circular letter be forwarded to the “ chairmen of the different Road “ Boards, stating that the League cou- “ aider the existing Road Board Act “ requires revision, and that it would “ be desirable, during the approach- “ ing session of the Provincial Coun- “ cil, this should be done; and re- “ questing the various chairmen of “the said Road Boards to forward to the “ League any suggestions that they “ may deem desirable to have embodied “in such bill, especially that their “ opinion may be had as to the desira- “ bility of giving power to Road “ Trustees to declare what description “ of fence in their particular district “ should be deemed a legal one.” We have not yet heard whether the Poverty Bay Road Board has received any intimation from the League on the matter, or what possible object a “ Protection ” League can have in handling the helm of a subject of this kind; but, nevertheless, it will serve to show to the good people of this district how necessary it is to form a combination —an organized plan and mutuality in action, in order to secure amendments of those things said to be faulty. The Highway’s Act is already promised as amongst the foremost of the laws likely to be considered by the Provincial Council at its adjourned sitting ; and from what we learn it is the general wish that the Fencing Act should be recast altogether, as it contains elements of dissatisfaction to nearly every class of settler in the province. As this is to be so, it is of the first importance that this district should have a proper, as it will have an able, exponent of its wants in Mr. Johnson, its elected member. Let the settlers then organize their forces, and court enquiry after the fashion of the Auckland League. But the League does not say for what purpose Road Boards should communicate these matters to it; and putting that body entirely on one side, as not likely to be of much use or assistance to this distret, we are decidedly of opinion that the resolution contains a dangerous principle, setting up, in fact, the theory of representation within representation. Road Boards are not representative bodies, and Protection Leagues are still less so. Road Board members are elected merely to discharge certain functions, for the performance of which there is not a shadow of political responsibility, and we object in toto to the principle attempted to be laid down by the “ Auckland Protection League ” that Road Boards are the recognized authority to make “ any suggestions they may deem desirable,” relative to altering the statute laws of the Province ; and we still further object to the theory that Road Boards are the proper persons to “declare what “ description of fence, in their “particular district, should be deemed “ a legal one.” There is much mischief embodied in such a theory, which, if put in practice, would be eminently unsatisfactory, as, without responsibility, the most that could be said of it would be, that it was the acceptance, by four or five gentlemen, of an official medium through which to express their private opinion on public matters. Again, what machinery does the self constituted “ Protection League” possess, to further these “ suggestions ” after they shall have been made ? The League “ considers the existing Road “ Board Act requires revision.” Well, what of that? Who cares ? Suppose the settlers on our parched plains form a “ solemn league ” and declare that the solar system is out of order on account ofthe heat; or that the existing method of supplying the earth wijh water “ requires revision ” What then ? The one is no more Quixotic than the other.

The settlers, too, we know, would repudiate any “suggestions” made by irresponsible Eoad Boards either to “ Leagues ” or anyone else, unless they are first invited to express their own opinion on the matter; although, if that were first done, we opine there is a more direct, effective, and constitutional method of dealing with such questions, than is understood in the unmeaning resolution of Auck-

land’s “ Solemn League and Covenant.” Let the settlers look to their political representative who is directly responsible to them, and back up his action by straightforwardly making him acquainted with their wants.