water became 4 million gallons with stand posts on roads numbering about five hundred and all the principal roads and lanes were piped aggregating about 112 miles. By 1871 the number of house connections rose to 2460 with the daily average consumption amounting upto six million gallons a day.

When in 1888 southern suburbs were included within Calcutta municipality further extension in the water supply was done by installing three more pumping sets at Palta with four large Kutcha Settling tanks with a total capacity of 82,750,000 gallons, 24 additional filtered beds, a new 48 inches C. I. pipe main from Pulta to Tallah, enlargement of Tallah reservoir with a capacity of 3 million gallons and two new pumping engines at Tallah. A new pumping station at Halliday Street with an underground reservoir of 4 million gallons capacity and another at Bhawanipur with an underground reservoir of 3 million gallons capacity were installed.

In 1903 the supply per day came upto 20 million gallons, daily average per capita consumption was 21.5 gallons with a total mileage of filtered water pipes at 185 in the town and 133 in the added area making a total of 318 miles. While water after filtra

tion at Pulta gravitated through the two mains into the underground reservoir at Tallah with a capacity of 8 million gallons, about 60 p.c. of the water from Tallah reservoir was pumped into the underground reservoir at pumping stations at Halliday Street, Wellington Square and Bhowanipur through a 30 ft. trunk main. This system

continued until the construction of the elevated reservoir at Tallah was made along with additional pumping sets both at Pulta and Tallah, constructed in 1911 under what is known as Mr. Maccabe's Scheme. It was designed to give a continuous supply to the citizens which was made obligatory under Act of 1899. But continuous water supply for 24 hours did not succeed mainly due to excessive wastage.

With increase of demand by pressure of population and development of the urban area it was found necessary for the Corporation tod raw up a Scheme to provide 70 mil

lion gallons of filtered water and 40 million gallons of unfiltered water daily. This scheme was provided by M/s. Moore and Bateman which was accepted by the Corporation on the 14th of December, 1921. The Scheme made a provision for supyly of 831 million gallons of filtered water and 65 million gallons of unfiltered water per day. Improvement and addition were done in the pumping stations, new settling tanks and filtered beds were made at Pulta while the existing 48 inches main pipe was extended to the delivery chamber of a new pressure station. A new 60 inches steel pipe was laid connecting Pulta with a new storage reservoir at Tallah. A new masonry reservoir of 10 million gallons capacity was made at Tallah for storage purpose. The pumping stations at Halliday Street, Wellington Street and Bhowanipur were abandoned. To this system recently a new scheme of laying a 27 inches steel pipe main from Pulta to Tallah with additional plants for supplying more filtered water, has bean put into force. The 72 inches pipe is nearly complete and with the completion of the additional supplementary provisions for augmentation of filtered water it is expected that the requirements of the citizens will be met.

The quantity of filtered water available having proved insufficient for the increased populasion the Corporation since 1953 started sinking big diameter size deep tube-well for augmentation of filtered water. This water is injected into the pipe lines supplying the consumers.

In the area of about 38 square miles, Calcutta has filtered water main measuring 642 miles and unfiltered water main 413 miles. Filtered and potable tubewell water measuring about 100 million gallons is distributed daily. Unfiltered water is pumped into its separate main measuring 65 million gallons from Mullick Ghat for supply to North and Central Calcutta while 25 million gallons is pumped from Watgunge pumping station for South Calcutta.

The council-manager (CM) form of local government is gaining ground throughout the world. In North America, 1,891 administrations use the CM plan; 1,821 in the continental United States of America, one in Puerto Rico and 62 in Canada (46 are in Qubec).

Outside North America there are 1,732 CM communities in West Germany, Ireland, Norway, Sweden and Finland. The system is being considered in Nigeria and Iran. Clearly, this unique form of local government is finding new adherents rapidly: 364 manaNorth ger appointments were made in America last year compared with 312 in 1961.

What is the CM (council-manager) system? How does it work? Whatever it replaces, does it do so advantageously? Does it create a municipal dictatorship, or simply introduces the efficiency of well-run private business into the hurdy-gurdy of local politics? If such efficiency does become manifest, is it at the expense of democracy?

Because democracy itself is not-and never can be perfect, it follows that no form of local government can be perfect. But a large number of intelligent people in North America and elsewhere believe the CM system comes as close to perfection as is necesssary for small to medium-size communities-so long as the city manager is a person of the highest calibre.

The CM system means this:

-Voters elect their representatives to council and council appoints a skilled administrator as city manager. Usually he holds the job "during the pleasure of the council",

This

meaning he has no written contract. suits both sides. If he dosen't do a good job, he can be fired. If he does do a good job, the council would be foolish to get rid of him.

-Council then functions as it is supposed to function meeting regularly, debating problems, and creating policy for the city.

-The city manager puts these policies into effect. He is the direct link between the elected policy makers and the people who do the physical work of runing the city, the department heads and employees.

-He hires and fires, prepares and administers the budget, makes recommendations and supplies information to the council, and co-ordinates the work of the civic departments. He strives to achieve economies and improve efficiency, and aims at a truly amicable relationship between employees' trade unions and the municipality.

A city manager can be compared to with the executive vice-president of a private company, although the comparison is not perfect.

Private enterprise has to create and sell a service or product and make a profit to keep its shareholders happy and provide for future growth.

A municipal corporation, on the other hand, must decide on the needs of its area, estimated how much money is required, and levy taxes to provide its funds.

In this comparison, the voters are the shareholders. They elect a board of direc

tors (the city council) and also a president (the mayor).

Usually, one man becomes the executive arm of a company board of directors, and most likely he will be called the excutive vice-president. This is, in effect, what a city manager becomes-with one important proviso: unlike most private company executive vice-presidents, he has no vote when policy is created,

This is the salient answer given to critics of the CM system who claim it dilutes the democratic process in favour of one-man rule.

"If all the administrative authority is placed into his hands and his alone", these critics say, "then you will end up with an elected council which has little or no knowledge of administration, but is merely a rubber stamp for the city manager's schemes and ideas.

"He may well become exasperated with delays and opposition from the less skilled elected councillors and seek the backing of the electrorate for his plans. Thus, he turns to politics to further his ends--and this is contrary to the principles of democratic government, even though his intentions may be of the best".

In fact, the answer to this must be found in one direction: the calibre and personal integrity of the city manager himself. If he holds fast to the ideals behind the CM system, he will ignore politics completely.

He will remain aloof to the blandishments of politicians and influential citizens with personal axes to grind. He will hire and fire without fear or favour, and he will always bow to the policy decision of his council and implement those decisions as best he can.

One medium-size city now using the CM system is Windsor, in Canada.

Some years ago Windsor politicians became worried over the heavy burden of administration on their shoulders. And the burden was getting heavier every year.

Any member of the city council found that the time left for meeting constituents,

even

talking to department heads-and occasionally enjoying some family life-had almost disappeared.

A councillor's life was filled with committee meetings, tens and scores and hundreds of them every year. Windsor had a conventional set-up: mayor (elected at large), four controllers (at large), and 10 aldermen (two from each of the five wards). (In Canada all these civic cfficials are paid).

The Board of Control (mayor and controllers) was the executive arm of the council and wielded considerable power. Any recommendation from the board concerning money matters or personnael required a twothirds vote by council to upset it.

Under the mayor-board-of-control system, Windsor (like other cities using this method: Toronto, Hamilton, Ottawa, etc.) was loaded to the teeth with the committees. Committees on works, traffic, property, planning, parks, recreation, welfare, the list went on and on.

Any new proposal would start its official municipal life at a committee meetingprobably consisting of three aldermen and one controller. The committee would discuss the proposal, take a vote, and submit a recommendation to the board of control, launching it on a tortuous route toward a final decision.