PUBLIC MEETING.

Nelson Examiner and New Zealand Chronicle, Volume XIII, Issue 695, 23 December 1854, Page 2

PUBLIC MEETING.

A public meeting was held in tbe Court House, on Tuesday evening last. " to consider the propriety of the steps taken by the Government and the present Trustees in relation to tbe objections to the claims of voters." Mr. Cann was called to the chair.

Mr. Travbks proposed the first resolution, and denounced tbe course taken by the Trustees and Superintendent, in appointing a person to object to votes claimed under the Trust Funds Act, and characterized the proceeding as a violation of the principles of representative institutions. He concluded a speech of Borne length by moving—

" That in tbe opinion of this meeting tbe appointment of a Public Objector is not warranted by tbe Nelson Trust Funds Act, and is a direct infraction of the principles of a representative institution."

Seconded by Mr. I. M. Hill.-

Mr. A. G. Jenkins, the Secretary to the Board of Trustees, produced the correspondence which had passed between the Board of Trustees and the Superintendent on the subject of appointing a person to object to votes improperly claimed, and stated that he believed the Trustees had been induced to move in the matter in con* sequence of an article which had appeared in the Nelson Examiner, counselling all persons who bad a "shadow of a claim" to a vote to get their names on the roll. He would therefore move as an amendment —

" That the appointment of a Public Objector is, under ordinary circumstances, most objectionable, but, taking into consideration tbe very dangerous advice contained in the leading article of the Nel ton Examiner of 22d November, tbe appointment of an Objector to revite the Electoral Roll for the approaching election of Trustees for the administration of tbe Nelson Trust Funds appears most desirable."

Mr. Elliott, as the editor of the E*aminer, called on Mr. Jenkins to explain what he | meant by the word " dangerous" advice. The meaning of a sentence culled from the Examiner had been greatly perverted, as would be *een if j the whole article was read, and the eentence rei ferred to viewed in connexion with what had preceded it. There was a doubt whether buildings and other improvements gave a value to land under the Trust Funds Act; and in noticing this be had advised persons to claim in right of such improvements. Such at all events was his intention. He had never intended to recommend persons to claim who were not entitled to vote at all. The words used were perhaps not happily chosen, but certainly they did not bear the construction attempted to be put upon them. Mr. Jenkins was glad to hear the explanation given by Mr. Elliott, and would substitute the word "imprudent** for "dangerous" in the amendment. Mr. J. Armstrong inquired of Mr. Travers who, in his opinion, were the parties to blame for the coarse taken in objecting to claims to vot«. r .^ ..._. ; „ _ . ,

Mr. Tkaveks had no hesitation in saying that the Superintendent was the party mostly to blame, although the TruKtees had tdso acte J improperly. The Superintendent ou«ht to have known better than to have acted on the suggestion of the Trustees. He did not mean to nay that the Superintendent had acted wrong in tentionally, but believed that he had done no from not having sufficiently considered the course he adopted. After some irrelevant discussion, the Chair man put the amendment to the meeting, winch, which, not finding a seconder, tell to the ground. The resolution was then put and carried