CHIEFLY ABOUT "LAPSES.'

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 206, 29 August 1916, Page 8

CHIEFLY ABOUT "LAPSES.'

BREEZE IN THE MOUNT EDEN COUNCIL. MOTI¥-_S OR PRINCIPLES r "The Cormfffi regrets that the legal opinion of the 'borough solicitors, dated January 26 ultimo, in reference to the Tarising of loan moneys, was not communicated to its members for their information and guidance; and directs that in future any legal opinion so obtained shall be laid upon the table' at the meeting next following its receipt." So ran a motion of -which Mr. Stewart had given notice, and which he moved at the Mount Eden Borough Council meeting last night, but, after a debate quite foreign in blunt directness of warm speech to the customary decorous language of this local body, the Council declined to either regret or direct in the manner requested, and emphatically turned down the resolution by eight votes to two. Mr. Stewart, in moving the resolution, stated that it expressed merely the principle that every legal opinion obtained by the Council should be laid on the table for the guidance and information of all members. "There was something radically wrong," he stated, concerning a legal opinion about which he had asked at a recent meeting of the Finance Committee. For the Town Clerk had said he could not recollect whether there was such an opinion, or whether it was in the oilice. Next day the clerk had intimated to him that be had discovered that there was such a legal opinion, and that he had been directed by the Mayor to communicate it to the speaker.

Here the Mayor protested that be had directed nothing of the sort, and statements by the Town Clerk and Mr. Hudson made it clear that tho clerk had mentioned the request about the opinion to Mr. Hudson (chairman of the Finance Committee), who had remembered the circumstances and the opinion, enabling the clerk to look it up, and had asked him to forward it to Mr. Stewart for his information.

Mr. Stewart held that that did not affect the principle that such a lapse of memory was a serious matter.

THE CIRCUMSTANCES EXPLAINED.

* Tho Mayor pointed out that it was sometimes undesirable, possibly prejudicial to the Council's interests, that a legal opinion should be paced on the table. Any member of the Council had as much right as the Mayor to have access to all documents In the office, and a member with sufficient interest in the borough's affairs would exercise that right.

Mr. Stewart: That was the informa tion I tried to get from the Town Clerk

The Mayor Tetorted he could not see Mr. Stewart's motive for his motion, unless for self-advertisement, to give people the idea that he was the only member taking an interest in the borough's affaire. The Finance Committee decided to get a legal opinion in January, and to leave tho arrangement of a loan in the Mayor's hands. A favourable opinion was given 'by the Council's solicitors, in agreement with an opinion given previously by Mr. J. C. Martin, and the loan was arranged, and the Finance Committee at the time, of ■which Mr. Stewart was a member, was informed of the terms of the opinion. When the matter was raised again now, some months later, apparently Mr. Stewart as well aa the Town Clerk had forgotten for the moment that such opinion had been obtained and made known to the committee. Next day ho had been acquainted with the fncts and the opinion, and his Worship could not see the motive for this motion. IMPUTATIONS. Mr. Stewart: Your old standing orders expressly state that no member shall impute motives in debate. His Worship: There is a veiled insinuation in tiie notice of motion that information was deliberately withheld from the Council. Mr. Stewart maintained that the motion was merely a sincere effort to lay down the principle that every member of the Council should have full opportunity to know what the opinions of the solicitors were.

Again the Mayor stated that every member of tho Council had access to every document and communication that came to the Council, and if he did not do so it was because he did not carry out his duties.

After further passages with the Mayor Mr. Stewart stated that he intended to persevere with the motion.

Mr. J. Davis seconded the motion, in which he said he did not see anything objectionable. He had noticed that if a councillor pushed forward any question on which the Mayor did not see eye-to-eyc with him there were 'motives imputed to that councillor. . MOTION TURNED DOWN. ' Mr. Hudson considered that the motion was a reflection on the Mayor, and a sneer at the Town Clerk, and he that it would be rejected.

Mr. Bagnall said that while he had at first considered the motion harmlesslooking, the debate had given it a different complexion, and he suggested that it be withdrawn, now that the Town Clerk had explained the lapse or memory and expressed regret.

Mr. Stewart: I didn't notice any expression of Tegret.

Mr. E. H. Potter considered the whole debate a waste of time, and remarked that more time liad.been wasted in such •ways in the last two years than ever before.

Mr. Yates interjected that Mr. Stewart had not expressed regret, and when the latter said he could not remember that he had anything to apologise for Mr. Yates replied that it was apparently another lapse of memory, recalling that Mr. Stewart stated the Town Clerk had said the Mayor had directed him to send a copy of the debated opinion to him, when as it turned out the Town Clerk had merely said that' Mr. Hudson told him the Mayor wished it sent.

After a short reply by Mr. Stewart the motion went to the vote, and was defeated by eight to two, only the mover and the seconder supporting it.