South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1882.

South Canterbury Times, Issue 2946, 4 September 1882, Page 2

South Canterbury Times. MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 1882.

The Public Health Bill was read a second time in the House, on the 21st ult. Mr Tole in advocating it referred to the difficulty always experienced in moving local bodies to abate nuisances within their boundaries, and pointed out the short remedy^viz., appeal to the Resident Magistrate) which the Bill placed in the bands of the people. Two members spoke to the motion. One (Mr fehriraski) opposed it on the ground that it would place too much arbitrary power in the hands of individuals in enabling them to take proceedings against parties in the manner provided. We certainly cannot see much force in this objection. Trivial complaints of this kind are few and far between. The failing of the public is to be too long-suffering, and to endure too long without taking active ' steps, just whatever the authorities choose to inflict upon them. The remedy provided by this Bill has a double advantage, as. Mr Shrimski ought to have perceived. It provides an easy remedy to the public, and the existence of the remedy will undoubtedly serve to stimulate the local bodies in the direction of the abatement of nuisances, An things now stand, a citizen is, virtually, at the mercy of the local body, and his only hope of obtaining reform lies in the influence he may be able to bring to bear on the authorities—obviously a very unfair condition of things. Everybody knows the fate of a letter calling attention to a dismal swamp, a stagnant pool, or an open ditch. It is duly read, but other matters being uppermost in the mind of a Council, it is put aside and disregarded, The “ local, authority ” knows perfectly well that the petitioner can do no more than state his ease; and, if he choose, proceed by slow and expensive process, to bring pressure to bear in the matter ; and it is safe to assume that not one in a hundred will have time or opportunity for taking the necessary steps. The Bill, however, changes all this, and places in the hands of the burgess—-as easy a means of enforcing bis claim, as of recovering an ordinary debt, viz., an appeal to the Resident Magistrate’s Court. It strikes us very forcibly that such an altered condition of things will soon awaken these lassiz-aller indifferent gentlemen to the advisableness of doing their duty. This argument seems a sufficient one in reply to Mr Shrimski.

Mr Dick did not object to the Bill, bathe sought to modify it, sod bis suggestion, though perhaps a trifle superfluous, is worthy of note. He thought local bodies should be first applied to ; and, failing their taking action, any individual should be able to do so as provided in the Bill. It seems almost unnecessary to suggest ibis. Any householder enduring a nuisance is pretty sure to make his complaint first to the local body ; he is quite unlikely to take the extreme step first. If the Bill becomes law, we venture to say there will be found very little difficulty in bringing the local bodies to their senses ; a polite intimation of the existence of a nuisance will not be shelved. The proper official will forthwith be told off to see to ic. We commend this excellent Bill to the residents of Timaru. There are several spots we could indicate needing immediate reformation. If the stagnant pools in this Borough possessed petrifying power, Timaru would be able to boast of a matchless collection of petrifactions.