THE Marlborough Express. SATURDAY, SEPT. 21, 1872.

Marlborough Express, Volume VII, Issue 432, 21 September 1872, Page 4

THE Marlborough Express.

SATURDAY, SEPT. 21, 1872.

_ .. “ Givk me the liberty to know, to utter, sind torrgue Ireely according - to conscience, above all other liberties —Milton

Although a very delicate subject, we feel it necessary to say a few words relative to certain proceedings which took place in the Borough Council at its last meeting ; and while we do so we hope it will be believed that we have no desire to offend any, but, if possible, to aid in aveiting further mischief. In putting the Minutes, of the previous evening for confirmation, his Worship the Mayor proposed to . omit or expunge certain. words, which would cause a different meaning to attach to the proceedings there recorded. This was an error, as no Chairman can thus over-rid’e the body over which he presides. The Mayor certainly gave his reasons for this movement—which we will consider presently—and a rather lively debate ensued. This, we may observe, was in contravention of Standing Orders, clause 2,.which, referring to the Minuies, states that “no discussion shall be permitted thereon except as to their accuracy.” The Mayor himself raised a question of opinion,, and then gave his own impression of the meaning to be attached to clause 21 of the Standing Orders, as empowering him to give effect to it by ruling finally without allowing any Conn cillor to combat his opinion. The clause in question reads thus

“ The Mayor or Chairman when called upon to decide on points of order or practice shall state,the provision rule or practice which he deems applicable to the case without discussing or commenting on the same and his decision as to order or explanation in each case shall he final.”

—Jb rom this we inter that the Chairman cannot himself raise a question of doctrine, but may, when called upon, decide upon points of order or practice, giving his authority; but he may not discuss or comment upon the point. We will now consider the opinion repeatedly expressed in various shapes, with a yiew of proving that the Education Board was not a distinct body consisting of the same persons only as the Corporation, but were an integral part of it as created by the Act. That this opinion, which was .shared by. Councillor Dodson, is an incorrect one we believe for several reasons. Thus an Act passed by a Provincial Council cannot be made to override one passed by the General Assembly, nor to enlarge the powers of a body created by such, which wpuld the case if the

Mayor’s opinion was correct. The Municipal Corporations Act lays down the duties of the Councillors, but does not provide for any Education Committees; or, as Councillor Dodson repeatedly" styled the proceedings of the Education Board, as “ going into committee on Education.” Apart, from the complexity likely to be produced by such a practice, it would me vit ably clash with the School Com-

mittee, which is to be appointed by the Board. Besides this it is quite possible that the Provincial Council who created the Board might see reason to alter its constitution, which, if it was an integral part of the Corporation, would be impossible without an Act of the Assembly. Clause 17 of Standing Orders infers that Councillors are such at all times—out oi Council as well as in it—by laying down a regulation as to the course of conduct when in meeting of Council. The next point we shall urge is that, as Councillors or in committee of Council, it would be impossible to levy an Education Rate ; for the Act distinctly states that the Council shall not levy “general ” rates in any one year exceeding, one shilling in the pound,, but may make “ special ” and “ separate ” rates. But, without going minutely into the matter as to what constitutes these different varieties of rates, it will be conceded on all hands that none of these funds' can be diverted to Education purposes. The Council have levied the maximum rate of one shilling, and therefore can raise no more.

His Worship gave it as his opinion that the Provincial Legislature intended to bestow the duties of the Education Board upon the Borough Council as such, and furnished as his proof that the Act did not say “ the members,” but the Council itself; and that the absence of a provision for making Standing Orders was because they would be governed by those of the Borough Council. The last argument may be easily disposed of by reminding the reader that the same clause makes the County Boards also the Education Boards; and, since since they have hot any provision for Standing Orders, such cannot be adopted by their Education Boards.- The various provisions of the Education Act are those of a separate and distinct body provided with its own officials, and having a right to acquire and hold property, raising funds and dispensing them. But, fortunately, we have on record what the intention of the Legislature was in passing the Act ; for our own columns stated, at that time, that Mr Conolly, in moving the second reading of the Bill, gave as the reason for fixing the duties connected with Education upon the members of the Hoad Boards, that it was “ in order to prevent numerous elections,” and it was on this ground that the Member for Blenheim, Mr Robinson, supported it. . We trust that, having somewhat ventilated this vexed question, a similar view will be accepted by the Council, and that the spirit of unanimity and good feeling, for which our local Government has been always characterised, will continue to attach in all time.