BOARD OF EDUCATION.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 10125, 7 May 1896, Page 6

BOARD OF EDUCATION.

RIVAL CHAIRMEN.

EXTRAORDINARY PROCEEDINGS,

UNSEEMLY WRANGLING. At the meeting of the Board of Education yesterday the question olthe chairmanship was brought up immediately the members had taken their seats, and resulted in a very lively and heated discussion. The member.] present were: Mr. R. Udy (in the chair), and Messrs. Woodward, Luke, Wright, Lambe, Muir, and Harris. Mr. Udy, as usual, took his customary position in the chair, and called upon Mr. Rice, the secretary, to read the minutes of the previous meeting. In rising, in compliance with the request, the secretary was interrupted by Mr. Harris, who proposed that Mr. Muir should preside over the meeting. On the motion being pub to tbe meeting, Messrs. Muir, Lambs, and Wright supported it, the remaining members observing a strict silence. Mr. Muir then proceeded to the head of the table, and called upon Mr. Udy to vacate the chair, but hit request being met with a refusal, that gentleman seated himself on Mr. Udy's left hand, and with a view to conducting the business. M eanwhile the secretory continued bo read the minutes, but was called upon by Mr. Muir to desist.

Mr. Harris (addressing the secretary) said it was useless, and only wasting time, to continue the reading of the minutes. Mr. Wright also added his protest. Mr. Woodward asked what they meant by interfering, stating thab Mr. Udy had been elected chairman of bh« Board, and must be recognised as such. Mr. Muir said that the secretary and Mr. Woodward were interrupting the business of the Board, bub the sectetary continued to read the minutes in accordance with Mr. Udy's instructions. When the reading had been completed Mr. Udy called for the confirmation of tho minutes. He was still chairman of the Board, and purposed carrying out his duties. Mr. Luke supported the chair, and said there was no doubt that Mr. Udy was still chairman of the Board.

Mr. Muir refused to allow {Mr. Udy to carry on the business in face of his election. It was only a farce for that gentleman to attempt to do so. Messrs, Lambe, Wright, and Harris coincided with Mr. Muir. This was no way to conduct the affairs of the Board.

Mr. Woodward told Mr. Muir to attend to his own business; Mr. Udy would look after the chair.

Mr. Harris advised Mr. Woodward to look after his own. All that they wanted was a fair test of the question of the chairmanship. They would not stand being sat upon, and were prepared to fight it out on constitutional grounds. Mr. Woodward did not know that Mr. Harrio or his confreres had been sat upon as stated.

Mr. Wright would not be trodden under or bounced. They were determined to have the business carried on properly; they were in the majority, and would see that this was done- He- then asked Mr. Udy not to interfere, or he would have to eend for a policeman and have him removed. Mr. Udy, in reply, Raid he had no desire to retain the chairmanship; he was not a candidate, but at present he had a duty to perform to the Board and the public, and would retain his position until later on, when they would be given an opportunity of electing a chairman.

Mr. Harris said thoy were much obliged to Mr. Udy for his consideration, but were not inclined to allow him to continue. He had used his hob-nailed boots and dictated to them long enough, and the time had come when he would no longer conduct the affairs of the Board. No chairman should attempt to retain the seat by bis own casting vote, as Mr. Udy bad done at the last meeting. " Mr. Muir," he added, " will conduct the business and carry it on fairly and impartially, and you must take your place amongst the rank and file." Mr. Wright: Yes, come down. Mr. Udy asked the members to wait until they had heard the opinion of Sir Robert Stout, and then they could have a chance of settling the matter. They had asked for an opinion and should listen to it. Mr. Muir denied the allegation that they had sought tho opinion of Sir Robert as a body. Certain members had decided to adopt this course, but others had taken the opinion of a local solicitor (Mr. ft pier) on the question, and would not accept the opinion of Sir Robert Stout or that of the Board. Those who had sought ib might pay for it; he would object to it being paid for by the Board. Mr. Lambe had nothing against Mr. Udy personally, but considered that gentleman had not always acted properly and impartially. They had made a mistake last year, but this was not going to happen again. Mr. Woodward asked for an instance

where Mr. Udy had acted improperly, and Mr. Lambe said he could produce plenty. Mr. Udy said that during his ton years' connection with the Board he had always acted impartially and properly, and his actions would bear the most searching investigation. He asked that the business of the day be proceeded with. Mr. Harris wanted to know why Mr. Udy should come and plank himself down in tho chair at tho meeting, when it had always been usual to hold an election. Mr. Wright objected to Mr. Udy calling on the business paper. He was going down for a policeman. * Mr. Woodward advised him to bring up three or four.

Mr. Wright said ho could do it all himself if necessary, but gave consideration to the chair and to Mr. Woodward's grey hairs.

Mr. Muir complained that Mr. Rice was prompting Mr. Udy, and asked if the members were going bo allow this to bo done.

Mr. Wright protested against such pro ceedings, and would not allow it to go on. Mr. Rice had better be careful; the tide was on the turn, and they were not going to bo browbeaten, and Mr. Udy was not going to push anything down thteir throats. Mr. Harris told Mr. Muir to assert his authority of chairman—he was in the chair. Mr. Woodward informed Mr. Wright that they were not going to be ruled by him or by physical force. Mr. Umbo said they were not going to make tho mistake that had been made last time, by allowiing Mr. Udy bo take the' chair. The only proper course was to elect I a chairman now.

Mr. Muir submitted that the business of the Ist April should be taken over again, as it was not legal. Perhaps it would be bettor to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Udy said the order paper was beforo them, and he intended going on with the i business. He was astonished that any member should suggest sending for a policeman, and could only express his contempt of such a proposal. Mr. Wright For God Almighty's sake, don't talk about contempt. Mr. Muir said ho was prepared to take the opinion of the Board's solicitor as to whether the business of the Ist April was legal or not. ' Mr. Wright said tboy wanted to conduct the meeting properly, and in the best interests of the public. Mr. Udy again endeavoured to carry on the business, but was interrupted by Mr. Muir, who was of opinion that the delay was being caused to give Mr. Cooper a chance of being present. But they did not care for Mr. Cooper; he (Mr.,Muir) had been elected to tho chairmanship, and would conduct tho Hoard's business.

Mr. Lambe was anxious that the business of the Board should proceed, and thought that all the trouble might have been prevented had thoy agreed to his proposal at the previous meeting, relative to drawing lots fcr the chairmanship. The plan had been adopted by metropolitan bodies at Home, and was the correct manner of settling such disputes. Mr. Muir asked if they would proceed with the business of the Board, and hearing voices in favour, called upon, the secretary to read the minutes. Mr. Udy said Mr, Muir was out of order in so doing, and that gentleman replied that such was nob the case. He said Mr. Udv was out of power. Mr. Lambe said Mr. Udy had signed the minutes without putting them to the meeting. He would ask that a correction be made, and Mr. Harris also stated -that he had noticed another error that required correction. He had moved at the meeting on April Ist that the question of the chairmanship be referred to the Board's solicitor, [but this did oq&appear. .

Mr. Woodward asked why they had not spoken when the minutes had been read, and Mr. Mnir replied that no minutes had been read. Mr. Woodward then called the attention of the members to his having been threatened with personal violence, and Mr. Muir called upon him to sit down. Mr. Woodwood refused, and said he was not address* ing Mr. Muir, but Mr. Udy, but on again again beii g aopealed to resumed his seat. Mr. (J\y thWi called upon, the secretary to read its chairman's report, at same time intimating that he had no intention of vacating tlu- chair. Mr. Muit moved the alterations of the minutes and said that the buiineiu was going to be carried on by himself as chairman,

Mr. Udy said ho would be responsible for Mr. Rice's action, and ordered the reading to go on. Mr. Rice complied, bub Mr. Muir told him not to attempt to proceed, and Mr. Wright (turning to Mr. Rics) added, " For goodness sake, man, do not go on." Mr. Lambe then read and handed in a protest to the effect that i." We, the undersigned members of the Board protest against the business transacted on April 1, 1896, on the grounds that there was no chairman of the Board on that date.—

Signed, A. R. Harris, J. Henry Wright, W. Lambe, James Muir." Mr. Rice then asked to be allowed to make a statement. He pointed out that tho opinion of an Auckland solicitor had been taken and the opinion of a Wellington solicitor was on the table. He then suggested that the copies of latter opinion, of which there were six be handed round.

Mr. Muir cautioned members not to read the opinion until they knew who was going to pay for it. He was nob going to be responsible. Mr. Harris thought the Board's solicitor should have submitted the question to Sir Robert Stout and not two members of the Board, whom he did not consider competent to do so.

In this contention he was supported by Mr. Muir, who was of opinion that ib was a direct snub to the Board's solicitor,

and in fact to every solicitor in Auckland, and surmised that the thing had been done in the hole-and-corner way that characterised the whole of tho Board's business. Mr. Udy objeotod to Mr. Muir's statement. Mr .Lambe contended that tho case had not been fairly and impartially submitted to Sir Robert Stout. There had apparently been no mention of his resolution of March 24th, to the effect that this Board meet on April Ist for tho election of a chairman, which had been pub to the Board and carried.

Mr. Harris based his objection principally on the fact that Mr. Udy had claimed to have retained the chair to prevent a deadlock, whereas no ono actually knew that such would have been the case had the

election been proceeded with. lie would defy anyone to say how he was going to vote, An altercation as to the chairmanship followed, both Mr. Udy and Mr. Muir ondeavouring to conduct the business. Mr. Udy reiterated the statement) that everything he had done during his five years in the chair would bear investigation. Mr. Muir said tho barnaclo-liko tenacity with which Mr. Udy clung to tho chair had led bim to believe that there was something wrong. Ho had, therefore, gone through the documents of the Board, and had a suspicion that everything was not right. Mr. Woodward objected to the allegations, and asked for proof, Mr. Muir replying that he would prefer to have an inquiry instituted. The wrangling relative to Mr. Udy's right to retain the chair again continued, Mr. Udy ultimately pointing out that there was a legal remedy. They could appeai to the Judge in Chambers, but in the meantime be would continue in the chair.

Mr. Lambe and Mr. Harris would agree to this if Mr. Udy would vacate the chair, and Mr. Wright ventured the opinion that the judge oould not go outside the statute. Mr. Harris submitted that if Mr. Udy had walked in and explained that a deadlock was imminent and offered to submit! the

matter to the judgo, instead of taking up the stand he had done in ordering Mr. Rice to go on with the business, he would have shown a great deal of common sense. He had also signed minutes that had nob been confirmed. Mr. Udy said the minutes wero signed, but there was an alteration ; but Mr. Muir protested, and said tho minutes must be submitted to the Board. Mr. Udy was not the Board. He then asked Mr. Rice to pass over the minutes, and the secretary offered to place the minute-book on the table. lb was then proposed bo alter the minutes to show that a protest had been entered against the proceedings of the previous meeting, on the ground that there was no chairman on that day, and Mr. Muir then put ib to the meeting and rulod that the alteration was agreed to, though one or two members objected to vote. The secretary then read tho chairman's report, Mr. Wright meanwhile handing the minute-book to Mr. Muir for his signature, under protest by Mr. Woodward, who contended that the proper chairman was not signing. The ordinary business of the Board was then proceeded with, amidst interruptions and with great difficulty until the reading of the opinion of Sir Robert Stout was reached, whereupon Mr. Muir objected to its being read.

Mr. Rico proceeded to read the opinion under protest, Mr. Muir ultimately moving the luncheon adjournment, which was carried.

As the members were about to retire, Mr. Lambe said perhaps it would be as well to hear the opinion road, it might facilitate matter*. The opinion was then read, the following being the essential part ot it QUESTIONS ASKED OP SIR ROBERT STOUT. 1. Are the yesuly retirement and election of chairman of the Board contemplated or provided for by the Act

2. Can the Board elect a chairman for a term or period limited otherwise than by the limit named in section 33! 3. What is th« legal effect of the Board's resolution, dated April 5, 1532 (quoted above)? 4. Must the chairman retire from the chair or resign his office as chairman before tho Hoard can proceed (under the resolution of April, 1882) to elect his successor? a. Has the retiring chairman—i.e., the chairman about to retire under the said resolution—power to exercise a casting vote In the case of an equality of votes for the election of a new chairman ? (J. If not, what provision exists lor deciding an election of chairman if the votes for two members jlmuM bo equal ? 7. Mr. Udy was one of three members to retire by effluxion of time, on March 31, 1831. On .M irch 10, ISM, he wan ro-olected a member of th • Boarjl, by the votes of th; School Committees. Has Mr. Udy, ''from any cause, ceased to li- a member of the Board," ami thereby vacated the office of Chairman? OPINION. I answer the questions put to me m follows l. No.

2. No. 3. I do not think any resolution of tha Board can alter the terras of the Act or limit the powers the Board possesses, 4. 1 think there must be no permanent Chairman in existence Doforo any new Chairman can bo elected. 5. No. 0. There is no provision. 7. This question is not free .'rem difficulty; birt, as Mr. Udy was re-elocted before his term expired, I do not see how it can be said he ceased to be a member of the Board.

Mr. Harris said the whole thing had evidently been fixed up. The Board then adjourned. Shortly before the hoar for resuming business Mr. Muir entered the Board-room and took up his position in the seat vacated by Mr. Udy, and She latter Rontleraan, entering immediately afterwards, seated himself alongside Mr. Muir. Mr. Woodward rose and objected to Mr. M air's action, which was, ho considered, in direct opposition to Sir Robert Stout's dictum, to tho effect that Mr. Udy still retained the chair.

The business on tho order paper wan then proceeded with, both Mr. Udy and Mr. Muir moving the resolution!) submitted. Before the business had been completed Mr. Muir rose and objected to Mr. Udy making statements as though he were chairman of the Board. The reason why lie refused to vacate was evidently obvious. Mr. Udy called for an explanation, and Mr. Wright, pointing to a piper in Mr. Muir's hands, said that gentleman evidently had something to bring forward in connection with the charge. He had better let tbom hear what it was.

Mr. Muir then stated that he had gone into the documents of the Board, and had found ft statement of chairman's expenses botweon April 10,1893, and April 10,1891, amounting to £25 9s 4d, which had been received by Mr. Udy, and apparently without the sanction of the Board. He had nevor passed the amount, and never rememborod it coming before the Board. There was also a cheque for £10a 10d, in October of 1893, Why bad this not been included

in the statement! He then proceeded to ] men tion severalother matters, and contended that an inquiry would be necessary. a y Mr. Udy, in reply, said he could account for every cent containod in the statement, and also for the £1 03 lOd which had been kept separate from the larger amount owing to us, having been & joint expenditure for atrip made in the interests of the Board by himself and Mr. Theo. Cooper. After replying to the charge?, ho stated thai he would court every investigation, and called upon the secretary to produce the vouchers I of expenditure which had been passed in ' the usual way at a meeting of the Board. Mr. Lambe said he could not recall the passing of the amount; he |iad inquired for it at the time, and could find no traoe of it. the vouohere were then produced and explained by the secretary, Mr. Muir objecting to the manner in which tihoy wero " slumped" together. After 'further discussion the matter dropped, the Board unanimously agreeing to adjourn until Wednesday next at 10.30 a.m.