CITY COUNCIL.

Press, Volume XXXIX, Issue 5405, 23 January 1883, Page 2

CITY COUNCIL.

A special meeting of the City Council ras held last evening , at seven o'clock. Resent—His Worship the Mayor (in the ibair), Cra. Vincent, Hiorns, Louisson, 3owman, Brice, Jenkins, Prudhoe, Kiver md Thomson. The Mayor explained that the object of ;he meeting was to finally pass the Tramway by-law. - After some discussion, the passing of the by-law was postponed until the Council had received a reply to the letter sent to the Government in reference to the matter. The ordinary meeting of the Council was then held. A statement of finance was made, which showed that tht> receipts for the fortnight jhad been JES3B 14s 4d; expenditure, 1£2156 2s lid ; credit balance at the Bank, 49 4d. Mr L. C. Williams applied for a remission of the fee charged him for a wine and spirit license, on the ground that he had paid for the whole year, and the currency of his license was only for six months. Application refused. A letter was read from Mr John Whitelaw reporting that he had completed the valua ion of the city for 1883, and that the total rateable value of the property in the four wards was .£253, 210. Mr Whitelaw [also forwarded a comparison of the valuation list with that of 1882. Reductions amounting to £5340 had been made on 1350 of this year's assessments. The total number of entries was 4219, so that the [reductions covered 30 per cent, of the [entries. The reductions were for the most ■ part on account of lowered rents. '. Mr C. M. Gray wrote on January 15th stating that when he applied for the reception of a deputation by hia Worship, he ; and others who were opposed to the Council's proposal in regard to the licensing districts regarded it as the spontaneous AlTlH.Tifl.Tvifin TPoITI T.flA I I/ITITI/Ml O_O ft TtrhAm If:

■ emanation irom tae uouncu as a whole. It Jfeppeared from a subsequent letter from his ■jVorahip, published in the "Star," that mc Council in adopting the resolution was Snly acquiescing in an opinion held by his BVorship personally. Under these' circumIstances they felt that they would be arguing &with a gentleman with a foregone conclusion. The idea was therefore set 'aside, and it had been decided to appeal idirectly to his Excellency the Governor, gbecause—l. Those opposed to the Council's Bproposal thought that body had acted with g-undue precipitation in hurrying the resoj|ution through without notice. 2. The Ratepayers had never requested any change En the size of the districts. As they were Mlterested from other than motives repre|Sented by £ s. d., they regarded the movement as premature and uncalled for. 3. sjPhey regarded the employment of the KHouncil's officials in canvassing for signaItpres to the petition in favor of the change jws unfair and improper. 4. Bearing in Blind the fact of large districts being the Hane of the Licensing Act of 1873, it was Ixceedingly unbecoming of the Council to astitute such changes as would have the [feet of rendering the city as a whole ntirely unworkable for local option purjoses. 5. Seeing that the Act of 1881 was htended to give the ratepayers a more fflcient control over the liquor traffic, they protested against the amalgamation of diss ricts as having a decidedly opposite I ffect. 6. The expenditure of .£6O or .£7O a wear out of a drink revenue of .£2OOO ought jJRot to be allowed to weigh when expended TOr the ratepayers' good and the proper Administration of the law. 7. The movement originated by the Mayor was without precedent in. the colony. 8. Any meddling with or alteration of the Licensing Act which met with the unanimous support of ■ie publicans ought to be sufficient to mdi Hite to the most obtuse intellect that the Hroposed change was not made in the inHbresta of the public, but of the publicans. ■The proposed amalgamation would enable She publicans to elect whom they pleased jfn the Licensing Committees, and would Effectually decide'the question of the early $r late closing of publiehouses. X The Mayor, in referring to the letter, ■aid—A3 the Council will have noticed, the abuse which decided these gentlemen to «bandon the appointed interview was a fttter which I felt bound to insert in the ffstar " in answer to one appearing in the 9revioue issue of that journal accusing Mr See, the Returning Officer, with being the JBistigator of the action in question. In vßiatice to Mr Lee, I felt it my duty to aromptly contradict this. 'At the same &ne, I took the opportunity of stating my »asons for the steps taken, and this has «awn out numerous correspondence not fimplimentary to myself, and accusing mc at all kinds of unworthy motives, and it jns resolved to make a direct appeal S his Excellency the Governor to disBow the prayer of our petition. I confess w disappointment that those gentlemen MkL not afford mc the opportunity of meetX them. I feel that I might have Sphvinced them that I am not of such an spstinate disposition as they would make le appear, but amenable to reason, and Sjpat the present Act, on which they seem S> pin so much faith (and which principally emanates from the great temperance reP>rmer, Sir William Fox, and waa passed Jy Parliament *o favor his cause), is a iomplete failure as a means of assisting or nproving the temperance cause, and has, n the contrary, had an opposite effect, nd been the means of increasing the .umber of public-houses by five or six rithin the city and to a similar extent in ie borough of Sydenham, which preiously enjoyed the proud distinction of jthe model borough, but cannot now maintain that appellation. 2. It provides for |he licenses being extended until twelve |>'clock. It is contended that drunkenness has increased in consequence. 3. It ;give3 publicans the privilege, by paying ■an additional fee, of erecting as many oars as they think fit. provides for charters being granted to any body of forming themselves into a Clab and conforming to certain rules, and gives them Sfche right, on payment of a fee of five

gpounds, to drink at all hours: I think I Eiave proved by the foregoing that the temg>erance body are incapable of being, .reformers. They can preach, but are to recommend a sound remedy. ifTheir Laudable effort to prevent drunken;ness has resulted, as I have shown, in considerably increasing it. It is therefore ftime that the more sober citizens who r detest drunkenness just as much, and are as earnest in their desire to bring about a fcbetter state of things, should take the baatter in hand. Personally I amj mot interested either way, except that* endeavor to benefit my fellow men. iAnswering their several protests I would ■sum them up a3 follows—l consider it

fwithin the duty of the Council, without [being specially requested by the ratepayers, to move or take the lead in any i matter likely to benefit the citizens, and falso to avail themselves of the assistance of ■heir officers if considered necessary, as it in this instance, on account of this. Elections being close at hand. The previous Licensing Act was, in my gpinion, superior to the present one. It gave the Bench, ample power to refuse new jpcenses, which they judiciously exercised. did not show a desire to avail themselves of the control of the liquor traffic placed in their hands. I believe if Bbey choose to exercise their privilege Binder the proposed amalgamation, it would pc equally effectual. The statement that (this amalgamation serves the interest of the publicans seems to mc absurd, as it is Well known that at the first election last year the publicans and the temperance body united in recommending five candidates to serve the whole four districts. From this it would appear that what is tho publicans' is also the temperance interest. As to the amalgamation interfering where the ratepayers have decided against tha increase of public-houses, I think their iieeiaion should stand good, and to further

[support it I intend to forward a leb& t j-jfc Ojjjppanying the petition, requestor *««, 1 Government to instruct the new Ct 1 sion t* uphold that decision. Thia'U jmi I shall say on this question, and shall not 1 notice«jy further ravings. | In X&ply to Cγ. Jenkins, Hiip-Worship said that the petition fa favoi'of the proposed amalgamation of ft* lioeasini? districts had originated withhinl" self, as he considered it his duty to nun* in the matter. The ratepayers hara» signed the petition in large numbers £ could not be withdrawn, ft would be t» the Council to say what would be don* with Mr Gray's letter. **

Cr. Prudhoe moved that the letter ]* not received. Hβ considered that it «v not a proper letter to address to tl» Council, and was not couched in respectful language. ■ , Cr. Hiotnß seconded the motion. '

Cr. Thomson did not think the Council would be justified in treating the writer «£-• the letter with discourtesy, because he himself had not used courteous lanirenee to his Worship. K^e Cr. Prudhoe would amend hie motion, to the effect that the letter do lie on th» table. He had no desire to be d», courteous.

Motion as amended agreed te. A letter was read from Mr Wm, Pratt Deputy Chairman of the Tramway Cobu pany, on the subject of the propoge& alteration of the tramway terminus ia Cathedral square. He concluded that tfa} Council, by its resolution, had decided. t$ prohibit the Company from remedying the present dangerous praotico of tnking m> and discharging passengers in the centre of a crowded thoroughfare, besides oV i structing the traffic. The proposed alto*, tion would not benefit the Company, lfof would provide increased safety and coofort to travellers at considerable expeijgj on the part of the Company. Mr Pretfc continued—" As the alteration referred to has long been desired by the public, ita; necessity admitted by the Council, aaj preliminary steps taken for effecting it bj the removal of the cab etand, and beinjia. accordance with the original plans aaj deed of concession, is in no manner ooa. tingent upon any by-law as implied in tits above resolution, the Company have yet tfr learn what valid objection the Council have to the alteration being at once and*, taken, and for the carrying out of whisk the Board are anxious to take immediate steps."

In reply to Cr. Jenkins, the Mayor said that the Tramway Company did not p»». pose to give up the lino running along tite centre of the street. .-■ vS

Cr. Vincent explained that the Worh Committee in an interview with the reprfc sentativee of the company were met witij the difficulty that the company persisted 4i retaining the central line for shunting pttt poses. ,\

The consideration of the letter was de ferred until after a reply had been received to the Council's letter to the Govemmmrf on tramway matters.

The City Surveyor's report was road. Hi stated amongst other things that the cost of Manchester street bridge hai beea .21530 19s 4d.

Cr. Louisson moved—" That the Liglit ing Committee be asked to take into ca& si deration the providing of, say, fifty act ditional lamps for the better lighting d the city, and that they interview the Qat Company to see if any all round reduction could be made in consequence."

Cγ. Bowman seconded the resolution, which was put and carried. A report was received from the By-la* Committee recommending that a letter r» ceived from the Cabmen's Society ehouH be referred fco the City Solicitor. T3i letter was to the effect that the cabnwa had decided not to take out any license under the present by-laws. }) Cr. Louisson explained that the objection of the cabmen applied chiefly to the bj. law requiring them to remove passongesf luggage. He had pointed out to seven! cabmen that they ware only required to take luggage a few yards from the cab. S was not intended that a cabman should!!' away from his horse's head for a greats distance than 10ft or 12ft. - . The Mayor said the cabmen /ere trade? the impression that the by-law was ulti% vires, through being contradictory, awl they desired to take advantage of tbiefe remove objections they had to other cob; ditions imposed upon-ihem—notably v titf' requiring them to go from the station to the North belt for the minimal fare. ->r

. Cr. Thomson said he came to the CouMil ■ prepared to move that the by-law requirSf cabmen to cany luggage should be "aft , pungod, but the cabmen ac a body by thrir ! letter had shut his month and placed the* > selves out of court. There was no # . denying the fact that the cabmen want ; the license fee reduced, and also to re4tj£ > the distance of one mile. Under the** ■ cumstances there was no other course o0 > but to refer the matter to the City Bp' . licitor. '" ' Cr. Hiorns defended the by-law. . % > The report of the Committee t* adopted. #T i Chi the recommendation of the Deal ; mental Committee the Council agreed ! increase the salary of the Bate Colleffl : by £2Z> per annum. ; §? At the suggestion of Cr. "Vincent it Wi decided to write to the Inspector of Feftf' calling his attention to the practice 'iff dulged in by boys of digging np them on the banks of the river for the pnrfftlt of obtaining worms for fishing. ';,!, Cr. Brice aeked if anything had Wft done with regard] to the Cathedral m reserve? ■ ti The Mayor'said the Committee* Sj not yet been able tj report on ject. \; Cγ. Bowman drew attention to the M*tice of discharging house drainage side channels. - «^ Cr. Louisson desired to call the fttfS tion of the Council to the fact that tfcfrfl escape door jat the Theatre Bojt&Jg always kept locked, and that tha'*| rangemente for a fire escape requuwj the Council were systematically neglewff The words "Fire Escape" were up, but in case of fire the place wouHl nothing but a trap. The managemeoi| the Theatre persisted in placing the gangways, which was a very- dangewf practice. He moved—" That notifies sent to the owner of the Theatre BM that on the next occasion when enyofjjj doors of the fire escapes from the Tk"l| are found to be closed during a ance, the license will be cancelled." '^S Cr. Jenkins seconded the motion, W* was put and carried. -'js After granting a number of licenses,** Council adjourned. ,-%=