THE CIVIC CHAIR

New Zealand Times, Volume XXXVII, Issue 8362, 24 February 1913, Page 6

THE CIVIC CHAIR

MAYOR AND COUNCILLOR FROST. A NEW MOVE FORESHADOWED, Councillor Frost states: “In your columns on Saturday the Mayor was given the opportunity of making a second statement regarding his ruling. It ia not my intention to repeat or make any further reference to the drafting of the famous clause, but as he flatly denies my statement—which", I contend, is amply proved by the officers and members of the council who were present at the time—and as _he also claims to be very consistent in all his actions. I will not put him to the trouble of having again to deny the facts. He goes on in his statement to say that he felt so strongly on the policy of not parting with any portion of the town belt or reserves that he was prepared to call the citizens together in order that they might express their protest against such a procedure. Why didn’t the Mayor, who was at that time a councillor, enter his protest at the council meeting held on June 4th, 1908, when the following recommendation was brought down by the reserves committee : ‘That part of section 8, town bolt, bo granted to the Newtown Tennis Club at an annual rental of £5 per annum’ ? This was carried without a dissenting voice, Councillor McLaren being present. At a later meeting, on December sth, 1908, the reserves committee’s report contained the following clause; “That authority be given to complete the lease to the Newtown Lawn Tennis Club at NewtownThis again was carried by the council without dissent. Councillor McLaren being present. On June 18th, 1908, a subsidy of £SO was granted, on the recommendation of the reserves committee, to the Mitchelltown school committee, to assist in levelling a piece of the town belt to form a tennis ground, etc., which had previously been let to the school committee, at, I believe, no rental at all. Councillor McLaren was present and didn’t dissent. I would like to ask him, in face of the above, where all hia righteous indignation comes in, when he had already been a consenting party to the Newtown and Mitchelltown transactions? Why does he suddenly raise this storm about the application from Kelburne P I wish to make it clear that I don’t desire to complain about his opposition to the committee’s proposal, but only his method of preventing the same coming before the council. “I would also like to refer to your sub-leader in Saturday’s issue, in which vou say the council should have adopted the constitutional remedy. You state that the council is perfectly at liberty to disagree with the Mayor’s ruling. It is quite apparent that you don’t understand the actual x>osition, or vou have written with a very biased mind, as I contend that every constitutional effort was mad© (1) by moving the suspension of the standing ordera; (2) hy moving that the meeting disagree with the ruling of the Mayor, both of which he. declined to put to the meeting, leaving no other course open on that occasion. I can assure you that the matter will not be allowed to drop here. The next move will, undoubtedly be one that will be constitutional and in accordance with the provisions of th© Municipal Corporations Act, 1000. n