THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1880.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3485, 25 February 1880, Page 2

THE Evening Star. PUBLISHED DAILY AT FOUR O'CLOCK P.M. Resurrexi. WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 25, 1880.

At the meeting of the Harbor Board yesterday, the late Chairman, Mr John Brown, expressed his conviction that the Harbour should be under the control of the Borough. We heartily coincide with Mr Brown in this view, believing that local self-government is overdone in this district, and though not holding the extreme opinion that the whole district should be governed by the one corporate body, we consider that consolidation in this respect would achieve desirable results'—greatly decreasing the expenditure, and insuring more efficient management. The imperfectly worked and independent machinery of a number of corporations is bound to cause collisions when so many conflicting interests are involved, thereby diminishing the strength of the whole and allowing inefficiency to step in where competency should* have its seat. Tbe truth of this principle is instanced in our own case by the Water Suplpy and Cemetery Committees, both of which miserable fiascos have shown the worthlessness and trouble of divided management. We believe that the affairs of the . Harbour could be efficiently and ecomically administered by the Borough, and consequently advocate the adoption of measures to have this consummated. Apart from the arguments on

the score of economy, etc.; we think that on the plea of justice alone the Borough should have the harbour management, as one of the inducements to form the Borough was the offer of the foreshore as an endowment. The breach of faith to the municipality is well known, and therefore we re-assert that not only would economical and efficient management follow the transfer of the trust, but also a measure of the long withheld justice would be done to the Borough.