THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT MUDDLE.*
This book is a consolidation and reprint, brought up to date; of the two " Memorandums " on local government which were drawn up by Mr. R. S. Wright for Mr. Rathbone and Mr.. W hitbread in 1877, and which have been the Bible of local government reformers, to which they have resorted for informa- tion and inspiration ever since. It is not creditable to Parlia- ment that the work of "bringing up to date" is of the most inconsiderable proportions, and one which even an Attorney- General's " devil " might have performed single-handed, though he has, no doubt, acted wisely in associating some one else LI the work With the single exception of the Highway Act of 1878, no statute has been passed effecting any tangible reform,
in local government; and it appears from this book that hitherto under that Act only some thirty highway districts, comprising 577 parishes out of 362 districts, with 7,886 parishes, have been consolidated with and handed over to the guardians of the union. The Municipal Corporations Act of 1882 was indeed an addition of considerable importance to the Statute Book ; but it was only, a consolidation Act. It has made the law with regard to muni- cipal boroughs simpler and easier to discover, but it has in no way simplified or improved the system of local government. System, indeed, there is none. The want of system which exists cannot be more forcibly brought out than it is by the " C.on- siderations with a View to Amendment of Local Government," which forms Part III. of the book. In words taken verbatim from the work of 1877, we read :—
"Legislation for local affairs has proceeded by piecemeal, creating special districts and authorities for special purposes, instead of estab- lishing units for general purposes of local government, with one con- solidated authority in each unit. The result may be shortly illustrated as follows :—The inhabitant of a borough lives in a fourfold area for purposes of civil government—namely, in a borough, in a parish, in a union, in a county ; none of these are conterminous (unless by accident) with any of the others ; and different parts of the borough are (or may be) in different parishes* and in different unions, and in different counties. He is, or may be* governed by a sir-fold authority,—the council, the vestry, the burial board, the school board, the guardians, and the county quarter sessions. All these are different bodies ; and inhabitants of different parts of the same borough are, or may be, under different vestries, burial boards* guardians, and county quarter sessions. He is, or may be, subject to a borough rate, a general district rate, a poor rate, a burial rate* and a county rate The inhabitant of a rural parish lives in a parish, in a union, probably in a highway district, and a county. He is, or may be, governed by a vestry, a school board, a burial board, a highway board, the guardians* and the justices. There are a multitude of minor matters in respect of which the districts, authorities, and rates are or may be addition- ally multiplied and complicated in all the above cases. Lastly; whether in the borough, in the local-board district, or in the rural parish, the inhabitant is or may be subject to a number of separate debts charged on the different areas which happen to include his house, and another inhabitant of the same place may be subject to a partly different set of debts charged on other areas and incurred by other authorities."
In fact, as Mr. Goschen said in 1871, local government is a chaos, "a chaos of areas, a chaos of rates, a chaos of authori- ties." The book before us does not deal with London at all or the chaos might have been painted in even blacker colours.
Still, as it is the picture is black enough ; and any one who wished to fill in the details of the picture can find plenty of materials for painting-in black. Take, for instance, the single subject of Highways. There are five kinds of highway authority, and it is an absolute chance under which the rural householder will find himself. There are, first, the turnpike trustees, now rapidly dying out, and exercising authority by levying tolls on the " turnpike " road ; and then there are the county justices exer- cising authority by levying the county rate, out of which they keep up the "main roads ;" then the Highway District, some- times now, under the Act of 1878, being the rural sanitary authority or guardians of the union; and keeping up the " high- ways "out of the Poor-rate, more often a Board of an area speci- ally constituted by order of county justices, and keeping up the
An Outline of Local Government and Local Taxation in England and Wales (excluding the Metropolis). By R. S. Wright and Henry Hohhouse, Barristers- at-Law. London ; W. Maxwell and Son, and P. S. King and Son. 1884.
" highways " out of a highway rate specially levied for the purpose ; while in boroughs the Council forms the Highway Board, and keeps up streets and roads out of the Borough rate. Then there are still 6,203 "highway parishes" which are not conterminous with ecclesiatical or poor-law parishes, but main- tain their own roads out of a highway rate managed by a parish highway-way surveyor, or, if there are over 5,000 inhabi- tants, a "highway board." The whole system has been further complicated by the pernicious application of "grants in aid" to highways, under which a quarter of the cost of "main roads" is repaid to the "highway authorities" by Parliament. If, passing from the subject of area and government we plunged into the subject of local rating, assessment, valuation, and debts, we should find that the darkness and confusion grew worse, and, as time goes on, are continually growing worse and worse. It is evident, every one is agreed, that "something must be done." The local government muddle is too bad to be allowed to continue. Hitherto "the Metropolis," as it is called, has stood in the way of a general measure. The Govern- ment have shown a wise appreciation of the circumstances by dealing with it first. The London Government Bill will clear the way for a general measure affecting the whole country. On the necessity for one general simple measure there has been a considerable growth in public opinion, as is shown by the difference in the introduction appended to this book and that in the memorandum of 1877, by Messrs. Rathbone and Whitbread. In 1877 they said : "It is no doubt impracticable to deal with the whole of this large subject in one Bill, or at one time." In 1884 they write : "It is now generally admitted that the whole sub- ject of local government and taxation ought to be considered with a view to certain lines being laid down for dealing with it systematically." In other words, a general Bill is needed for bringing the chaos of local government and taxation into one cosmos. Local government must cease to be a fortuitous con- course of atoms, and must become an organic system. The principle on which that system is to be established is, as the authors and introducers of this book point out, and as every one is now agreed, the principle of consolidation and simplifica- tion :—
" So far as may be, local affairs ought to be administered in simple areas or aggregations of simple areas, without crossing or interlacing. The unit of area should be the same for all local purposes, and larger areas should be, as far as possible, exact multiples or aggre- gates of that unit.' So far as may be, the local affairs of each area or aggregate of areas ought to be administered by one body for that area or aggregate. Bo far as may be, the rates should be unified in each area, and the debt of each area should be consolidated and ascertained."
In towns the question is comparatively simple. It is quite clear that the Town Council or Local Board ought to perform all the duties of sanitary authorities, burial boards, highway authorities, guardians of the poor, school boards, and the ad- ministrative work of county justices, especially including licensing. Nor, in towns, does the "unit" chosen matter much. When a town is divided into wards, the wards, as a rule, follow the boundaries, and are called by the names of the parishes. If the unions should be made, as they must be made, conterminous with the borough, whether the borough being the union is the unit or the ward being the parish, is a matter chiefly of nomen- clature. The borough rate would be one and the same for all purposes.
In the country, from the more entire absence of organisation, and the greater chaos of authorities, the question is more diffi- cult. Every one seems to be agreed that there must be a County Board, on which would presumably be represented all the different subsidiary areas, including municipal boroughs, in the county. But the question arises, which is to be the primary subsidiary unit outside boroughs,—the union, or the parish Mr. Groschen in 1871 argued for the parish. The authors argue for the union. On the one hand, the parishes never cut the county boundary, and often cut the borough boundaries ; on the other hand, the unions often, in no less than 176 out of 441 non-metropolitan unions, cut county boundaries, and often borough boundaries. The parish is the most ancient unit, and has most local sentiment ; but it has little regularity, and is almost entirely devoid at present of administrative existence. The union is the Ch, 'Aire of 1834 and of the Poor-law, and has no sentiment attached to it ; bat, on the other hand, it has been generally adopted for administrative purposes, and as rural sanitary authority, and education authority, and in some cases highway authority, has organisation and experience ; and its adoption would involve the least disturbance of ex- isting authorities. On the whole, however, we incline to the parish or township as the unit. Whatever unit is adopted there will have to be a readjustment of boun- daries and powers ; but there will really be less disturbance by adopting the parish than by adopting the union as the unit, while the great advantage will be gained of a much smaller area. For the area intermediate between parish and country, if one is needed, it would be better to adopt the area of the Petty Sessional Division—which is often the old "hundred," and might be revived under that name—than the union, since the unions were made "under local influence (i.e., the influence of land- owners), and the accidents of situation of workhouses," rather than on any principle of general convenience or real connection. On other points there is not much difference of opinion—at least amongst those who are not landowners and county magis- trates; and to the authors "it seems clear that county boards should take over the entire administrative work of the quarter sessions," including licensing ; and that" it may be expected in the course of a few years many other important matters will come into its province,—including, probably, some share in the work of private Bill legislation." As regards rates, there should be a "consolidation of the rates levied in each unit." The authors think that the "arguments are prime/ facie sufficient to establish the expediency of a prospective enactment" dividing rates between owner and occupier, as proposed by Mr. Goschen in 1870; and that "the system of valuation and assessment requires both simplification and some better manner of ensuring uniformity in ascertaining net rateable value,"—though they do not explain to us how that highly desirable result is .to be obtained. Those who desire to see the arguments pro and eon on these and various other points in the reform of local govern- ment fairly summarised, cannot do better than 'read Part III. For those who wish to know the facts as to the present con- dition of things, the book is an admirably arranged store-house, and, being the only one of its kind, is, indeed, indispensable.
Previous page
