COMPETENCY OF MINORS TO MAKE CONTRACTS.

Otago Witness, Issue 1340, 4 August 1877, Page 4

COMPETENCY OF MINORS TO MAKE CONTRACTS.

At the Resident Magistrate's Court, yesterday, His Worship (Mr John Bathgate) delivered judgment in the case of Rushton v. Brown, as follows : — This is an action for wages. The defendant ' engaged the plaintiff, a lad of sixteen, to work on his farm. No arrangement was made about , wages when the plaintiff entered his service. Subsequently, the defendant said he would give the plaintiff seven shillings a week. There seems to be no doubt that the plaintiff had capacity, to enter into a contract with the defendant. The Resident Magistrates Act, 1867, gives power to any person under the age of twenty-one to prosecute for wages in the same manner as if such person were of full age. Thii implies that an infant may contract for the hiring of his services. -At common law, also, an infant may contract, and although a contract be voidable, this is a privilege personal to himself of which no one can take advantage but the infant. His Worship having recapitulated the statements of the various witnesses, said : There is a conflict of testimony in this case, and a consequent uncertainty. One fact is clear, that the contract was made with the plaintiff himself, and not with the father, and I cannot hold the plaintiff bound by any conversation which took place between his father and the defendant subsequently, of which he knew nothing. The defendant having contracted with the plaintiff personally, the father conld not avoid the contract, or alter it, without the consent or knowledge of the plaintiff. Judgment for plaintiff in the sum of Ll3 Is 7d, in» eluding the amount paid into Court,

THE EDUCATION QUESTION. A conference of clergymen was held in the Vestry of Knox Church on Monday afternoon for - the purpose of considering the religious clauses in the Education Bill now before Parliament There were present— Bishop Nevill, Dr Stuarfc, the Yen. Archdeacon Edwards, and the Revs. Fitcfcett Davis, Watt, Professor Salmond, Dr Roseby, Dr Copland, Gow, Dolamore, Suther-land-Ross, Gregg, Maxwell, Blake, Bussell, and Lewis. The chair was taken by the Rev. Dr Stuabt, who said that he had before him a copy of the proposed Education Bill, and the object of the meeting was to consider the religious clauses which it contained. These were happily rerj; brief, and he thought that, considering the circumstances of the Colony, they were such as would command then- support He then read the following clauses :— "No child shall be compelled to be present at a teaching of History whose parents or guardians object thereto." " The school shall be opened •very morning with the reading of the Lord's Prayer and a portion of the Holy Scriptures. With this exception, the teaching shall be entirely of a secular character, and no child shall attend at the reading herein provided for if his or her parents or guardians inform the Committee or teacher, in writing, that they object to such attendance." " The school buildings may be used on days and at hours other than those used for secular instruction upon such terms as the Committee may from time to time preKsribe, subject to the approval of the Board." mtn reply to a question put by the Yen. Archoeacon Edwards, he said he had not invited Bishop Moran because he knew him to be so systematic a denominationalist and had always declined to attend the meetings of the University. The Yen. Abchdeacon thought that it was a pity that Bishop Moran had not been invited. The Chaibman repeated his reason for not having invited Bishop Moran, and added that that meeting need not be the final one. The clauses which he had read were the only one.? which bore directly upon the question before the meeting. Tbeßev. Mr Davies having made someobservations in regard to school buildings being used for' the purpose of giving religious instruction at other than the usual school hours, TheCHAiBHAN said that he had been told by Dr Cameron that at St. Kilda, in Victoria, where the system was purely secular, it was not considered odious to give religious instruction at other than during school hours. Dr Cameron had given him instances in which such instruction had met with considerable acceptance. The Yen. Archdeacon Edwabds asked how was it possible that children could have their breakfast, and be ready to go to school at 8 o'clock. # The Chairman : It does not follow religious instruction shall be given at the beginning of the day. The Yen. Abchdeacon did not think it would suit to give it after school hours, as children after having been hard at work all day would want to get out to play. To keep them in for the purpose of receiving religious instruction would make them loathe such instruction. After some remarks as to whether in Victoria ' school buildings were permitted to be used for the purpose of giving religious instruction in them, The Chaibman said that he believed that the North Dcnedin School could be obtained to give a Bible lesson in it in the evening. Such was his interpretation of the Act The Bey. Mr Davies : Just as the Saddle Hill School Committee give me the use of the schoolroom on Sunday. The Yen. Abchdeacon said that it would be absurd to expect that parents would send their children to school on any day except Saturday at 8 o'clock in the morning or 7 in the evening. It wai nonsense to call the provision in the BUI "religious instruction." The Chairman said that in Germany the schools met much earlier than in this country. He did not see any particular hardship in children meeting one day in the week at 8 o'clock for the purpose of receiving religious Instruction. In olden times the parish schools met at 7 o'clock. The Rev. Mr Fitchett thought that they were exacting too much, and giving too little place to religious instruction. The Yen. Abchdeacon: The saying of the Lord's Prayer and reading half a dozen verses out of the Bible is not " religious instruction." The CgATRKAN : Do you not think that it is a great thing to beget in children a reverence for Divine things and for the Lord's Prayer ? I think that it would come to a great deal in six or seven years. The Yen. Abchdeacon : I do not think so. The Rev. Mr Blake thought that the Archdeacon's arguments would also tell as forcibly against family worship, because a particular chapter was all that a parent might sometimes be able to read. He did not see why the schools should not commence at 9 o'clock. The Yen. Abchdeacon would be sorry to think tint religious instruction consisted in the repetition of the Lord's Prayer and in the readingof * portion of the Bible every morning. The Bey. Mr Gow : The object of repeating the Lord's Prayer, and reading a portion of the Bible every morning, is to familiarise children with the text of Scriptare. It was not to be considered religious instruction. It was to be ' supposed ttat Denominational : sts would make . provision for religious instruction otherwise. He laid great weight upon reading the Scriptures, as it laid a foundation for future instruction. Even if they were read without comment, they were so picturesque that they took hold of the young mind, which thereby became stored with Scripture views. Religious instruction may be given in the building outside of school hours, and this, I think, is a great mistake ; for I think if religious instruction is to be given at all it should be given in school hours, for it is monstrous to suppose that children should come out early in the morning, or stop out late at night I would have it given m school hours. The Chaibhan f Who is to give it ? The Rev. Mr Gow : The churches. If ycu do not do that another race will grow up here differing from what we would wish it to be. It ia quite plain that the State cannot give religious instruction. It is quite entitled to have the Lard's Prayer and the Bible read, but it cannot go beyond that The Yen. Abchdbacon did not object to the Lords Prayer or a portion of the Scripture being read, but who was to select ihat portion. If the teacher was a Roman Catholic he would select it out of the Douay version. The Rev. Mr Gow: The English version is the authorised version. The Rev. Mr FrrcHETr asked if any statesman could enforce the reading of the Bible, which, «o far as Roman Catholics were concerned, was as much a denominational book as was the Wesleyan Hymn Book. If they asked to have the Bible read they asked for denomi nationalism. In the interest of religion, he would wish were the Governmentto confine itself to the functions of the Government, namely, the giving of secular instruction. The Churches would give religious instruction if the pretext of its being given in schools were taken away. The mere reading of the Bible was but a form, and might be made utterly irreligious.

_ The Chairman remarked that it wag considered the most proper way by the Government for commencing and the most sacred way of training the young. The Government in effect said that children were not mere clod 3 but organised beings with immortal souls, and it was therefore desirable that certain habits should be formed. The Lord's prayer was universally accepted, and with all deference to the Rev. Mr Fitchett, he did not consider the Bible a denominational book, but one which had a standing in the corrmon law of England and was recognised by it. The Rev. Mr Fitchett : It shuts out the Roman Catholic from the public schools. The Chaibman : There is a strict conscience clause, and exceptions prevail in the cases of those who object to be present at the historical lessons or at the devotional exercises. The Yen. Abchdeacon : Supposing a Roman Catholic to be the teacher of the North Dunedin School, he would read the Douay version. - The Chairman : There was only one Roman Catholic that I ever knew of who was a teacher under the Otago Provincial Government. He was_ for some years a schoolmaster at tha Teviot, and I never knew that he objected to reading the English version of the Bible. He came to me and asked for a certificate. I told him he had better not come to me, and that if he were a qualified teacher to apply. He did bo, and got the school. He was the first man who welcomed the Bishop in his district. The Rev. Mr Fitchett: He was a bad Catholic. The Rev. Mr Gow (to the Rev. Mr Fitchett): Do yoa object to religious teaching altogether? I hold that the conscience clause completely naves the Roman Catholic who does not choose to be present. The Yen. Abchdeacon : Do you consider repeating the Lord's Prayer and reading a few verses oif Scripture, religious instruction ? The Bey.Mr Gow : Ido not know. But to read a portion of Scripture, and to repeat the Lord's Prayer, I do not know anything better than that I think that the Government deserves great credit for that Bill. The Roman Catholics' position is not infringed upon, aa they are protected by the conscience clause. The Rev. Mr Fitchett did not ignore the conscience clause, but the use of the Bible, which to Roman Catholics was a denominaj tional hook, impaired the usefulness of the school to the members of ..that religion from their stand point. It made the school a Protestant one, and they might; care very little for that from a Protestant point of view, but he considered that the Roman Catholics had a grievance. Theßev. Mr Davis said that the Roman Catholics had a grievance, and would always have a grievance. The Roman Catholic wa-> only in the same box as the Jew, anu he hoped thatthey would get on well together. Exceptions were made in favour of the Roman Catholics iv the case of history, because the histories used were in accordance with Protestant views. He thought a great deal had been done to meet the difficulty. He thought that the meeting would be able to get on better if they had a definite resolution before ifc, and he would accordingly move : — " That, whereas, Ist. There are very diverse opinions concerning religious instruction in the schools. 2nd._ The purely denominational system would irritate, and the purely secular system would shock, the general public. 3rd, The proposed compromise runs closely along the lines already pursued by the chief Provinces. 4th. This meeting deem it desirable to accept the Government compromise." He was a secularist pure and simple, and if he had the framing of a Bill he would make it secular purely and completely. He did not believe in the introduction of the Bible in any purely secular service. Let the State stick to secular teaching, for he was content to leave the rest to secular organization, and was directly sntagoia«tic to both the Catholic and Episcopalian system. He then proceeded to refer to the i prevailing system in the different parts of the Colony. Referring to the Otago system, he said that it had been universally accepted by all, except the Roman Catholics. The v en. Abchdeacon : No. ! The Rev. Mr Davis then went on to say that he had never heard any remonstrance or grumbling. There was a gentleman present who was in the habit cf giving religious instruction in the school in Ms district, but all who were in that district were members of the church of the^ minister to whom he referred. No complaint had been made to the Government. Tue Yen. Abchdeacon: Does that take place during school hours ? Mr Davis: Yea. The Abchdeacon: Thai is surely contrary to the Ordinance. The Chairman said that from thirteen to fourteen years he had been in the habit of giving religious instruction in the Old and New Testament to children on the occasion of school examinations. Ray. Mr Davis : Except on the part of those who hold strong denominational views, there has been general contentment with the present system, "which will not be "disturbed in any way by the proposed compromise. We ought to avoid the irritation which denomin<tticnalism would cause. I have lately come from Home, and kDow the strong feeling which it causes in some of the districts there. Its introduction here would deter for a loug while the carrying out of a national system of education. If the clergy obtains what dome of them claim as a right, the outcry in a big population like Dunedin would be very great. If ifc does take jrface, I vill be prepared to fight tooth and nail, and to the last stump of my pen, on behalf of the secular position. I thiuk that we would do well to accept the compromise offered by the Government. _ The Rev. Dr Roseby said that denominationalism was out of the question, and in the discussion of a subject such as that of education, they would have to accept something iv the nature of a compromise. In this BUI, the State undertook to give what was strictly within its functions, namely, secular education. He must say that, in reality, the religious clause of the Bill seemed to strike a very happy medium in this matter, and he was prepared to support Mr Davis's resolution. The Yen. Abchdeacon did not see Lhat it was a compromise. The Rev. Mr Gow said that it occurred to him that they were very much in the dark in regard to the provisions of the Bill, and suggested that the meeting should be adjourned to enable them to get copies of the Bill. The Rev. Mr Davis pointed out that an accurate synopses o£ it had appeared in the Daily Times and also in the Witness. Dr Copland said that the clauses, as read, showed that the synopses to which Mr Davis had referred were correct. The Rev. Mr Gow : As far as this motion is concerned, it takes the Bill as the Government gives it. I think that, if religious instruction is to be given to any purpose, provision should be made for imparting it within school hours. To profess to give it before or after school hours was merely Bhuntinq the matter into a siding. The Sev. Mr Davies asked if Mi- Gow was prepared to move an amendment, to the effect that religious instruction be given in school hours. The Chaibman said that tte Government did not undertake to give religious instruction. Besides, what right had the Government to

enjoin that the Churches of this land should do it ? If the Government proposed that he would ask it to mind its own business. The Rev. Mr Gow : I think that you are right there. The Chaibman had no doubt that if the Rev. Mr Gow wished to obtain the use of the South Dunedin School on Thursday oc any other day, for the purpose of religious instruction, that the Committee would be ready to meet his wishes. The Rev. Mr Gow : Though the Government does not make provision for religious instruction being given by its teachers, I think that there should be a portion of time within school hours when those wishing to do so should be at liberty to give religious instruction, Dr Roseby at this stage of the proceedings seconded the motion which had been proposed by the Rev. Mr Davis. The Rev. Mr Fitchett would like to see an amendment proposed in the shape of that indicated by the Rev. Mr Gow. He thought that the Government might be asked to make room for religious instruction. He did not mean that the Government should give it, but that it should make room for it. That they should sanctify the day by the repetition of the Lord's Prayer and the reading of the Scriptures, he considered nugatory, and it would lead to the belief that religious instruction was being given in these schools. As Christian ministers, he considered that their position should be that, if they wanted religious teaching done, they should see that it should be done by men who were in sympathy with it. If the Government wereto leave space tor religious instruction by religious people, it would be better than the piece of formalism which would satisfy no one except Mr Davis, and those who held his view of the matter. The Rev. Mr Watt said that- possibly a number of ministers of different denominations might wish to give instructions at the same time. The Rev. Mr Fitchett replied that that was a matter of detail. He did not regard it as an insuperable difficulty. The Rev. Mr Gow quite disagreed with what had been said by the Rev. Mr Fitchett in regard to reading the Scriptures at the outset, for he attached considerable importance to the fact of children being made acquainted with the Word of God. Bishop Nevill did not understand that Mr Fitchett objected to the Bible being read at the beginning of school hours, but that such should be regarded as religious instruction. The Rev. Mr Fitchett : The churches would not wish to have the Bible read at the com mencement of school hours if provision were made for religious instruction afterwards. The Rev. Mr Gow : I would have provision made within school hours, whereby these who wished to give religious instruction dhould have the opportunity to do so. The Yen. Aechdeacon: I would support that The Rev. Mr Davis said that he had thought seriously over this matter for the last ten or twenty years, and he still held strongly the impression which he brought with him to this colony. He was distinctly of the opinion that the only logical and proper course for the Grovernment to take was to busy itself only with the secular system. He was an out-and out rabid secularist, and he was willing to meet the Government, but he would not budge, The Key. Mr Fitchett : But you aie budging, and that most effectually. The Chaibman suggested that if the meeting were in favour of Mr Davis's motion, it might be passed, and then another could be proposed. The Rev. Dr Copland asked if provision such as that wished for by the Rev. Mr Gow did not exist. Would it not be competent for any clergyman who wished to give religious instruction in school to ask the Committee for leave to do bo at some hour not taken up with secular instruction ? % The Yen. Abchdeacon : There is no time to do so. The Rev. Mr Fitchett pointed out in Canterbury such permission had been refused in every case except two, on the grounds that religious instruction was being given in the schools — that was that the Bible was being read. The Yen. Abchdeacon moved the following amendment — "That in the opinion of this meeting it is desirable that permission should be given to ministers of religion or to persons authorised by them to give religious instruction to members of their churches within school hours, and that the Committee shall be reqnued to set apart a certain period during such hours for the purpose of religious instruction by clergymen, or by person 3 authorised by them." The Rev. Mr Gow could not agree to that. The Yen. Abchdeacon : It seems a dreadful thing to make secular education ef such importance, and that religious instruction is to be cr-tmmed into the children on one day only during the week. There is a large majority of | families in which no religious instruction is given either at home or in school, or anywhere else, and I challenge a contradiction of that statement. The Chaibman was sor^y to hear the statement made by the Yen. Archdeacon. It was the severest reflection upon the Church of Christ which he had heard during his life. Was it that the Church of Christ had such poor influence that there were tens of thousands of families without religious instruction? He believed that religious instruction was being given iv families, and he considered that the Church should be abolished if she could not reach *amilies and give them reli<jious instruction without having to go to Parliament, which was composed of both Jews and Gentiles. ' The Yon. Archdeacon : Perhaps Dr Stuart will tell us where this religious instruction is to be given ? I did not say that they are not willing to give it, but you do not give them time to give it. The Chaibman: Instead of preaching so much to your people on Sunday mornings, and catechising and instructing them, some of the time could be given to the instruction of the children. Bishop Nevill asked what was the point of order—how did it stand? The Rev. Mr Fitchett did not consider that religious instruction was being given, and he agreed with what had been said by the Yen. Archdeacon. Public opinion lequired them to pray for the adults and negociate their salvation. He would give them a specimen of what the result was. In hia own denomination in Victoria only one-fifth of the total number of children who attained the age of 13 years became "members of the Church, and he ventured to affirm that there was no Church in a better position than his was. He concluded by seconding the Archdeacon's amendment The Rex. Mr Maxwell did not believe the amendment would be acted upon, and he referredto New South Wales, where, he said, the ministers had the privilege of going into the schorls for the purpose of giving religious instruction. Only two availed themselves of the privilege — in fact ministers could not find timo to do it — and if such a provision were carried it would be a mere sham. The Yen. Abchdeacon : It's for people authorised also. The Rev. Mr Maxwell was in favour of a purely secular system of education, and he believed that the education which the State could

give must necessarily be only a partial system. Religious education must be sup{>lied by family instruction and the Cnurchea. He was in favour of the resolution moved by Mr Davis. The Rev. Mr Lewis proposed the following amendment — "That this meeting thankfully accept the provision made by Government for beginning school by Bible reading and prayer and asks in addition Archdeacon Edwards's amendment. The Yen. Abchdeacon objected to the amendncent, because it did not do justice to Roman Catholics, to whom he considered the greatest injustice was being done. He considered that the Catholic Bishop ought to have been invited to attend the meeting. The Chairman had stated the reasons why he had not done so. It would have been labour lost. The Yen. Archdeacon : Then if they did not come, it would have been their own fault. The Chairman : All you have to do is to propose that this meeting be adjourned, and then ask the Jewish Rabbi. Bishop Moran, and the Chairman of the Chiistian Disciples, to be present. Dr Roseby : And Mr Bright. Bishop Nevill asked had the Rev. Mr Stanley and Mr Oldham been invited? The Chairman said he had not done to, because they had not permanent charges. Bishop Nevill pointed out that they had permanent charges— that one of them had four or five charges. Dr Copland pointed out that all difficulty could be got over in this matter by stating who were present at the meeting. He did not see what great advantage wuuld arise from ad journing the meeting, and summoning other parties. _ He did not think they would again get so fair a representation of the clergymen as were then present. He therefore suggested they should go on with the discussion, and take a vote upon it. He felt bound to give his vote in favour of Mr Davis's motion. He expressed himself to the effect that he would feel inclined to support the amendment, only for the practical difncnltieF.' which it presented. Bishop Nevill snggested that they should dispose of the question of the adjournment, and he said that there were others who bad not been invited, who, if present, would affect the vote. Had he called the meeting, he would certainly have invited the Roman Catholic clergy, and would never have thought of excluding the ministers of any religious denomination. He therefore proposed that the meeting should adjourn. The Chairman asked, in case of un adjournment, who were to be invited ? Were they to ask the ministers of Dunedin only, or all those in Otago ? The Rev. Mr Gow : Advertise, and let all those come who chose. The Rev. Mr Davis said that the ministers who hai been summoned to the present meeting were thoso who usually attended ministers' I meetings, and he referred to the meeting in reference to the Gaol chaplaincy. The Yen. Archdeacon said it would have been perfectly ridiculous to have asked the Jewish Rabbi or the Roman Catholic Bishop to have attended a meetiug for the appointmentof a Protestant chaplain. The present meeting was in reference to a subject which included all. Yet they fcuni that the Roman Catholics and the Jews weie excluded. The Chaebman objected to the proceedings being cbaracterised as unfair. He had no strongfeeling against the Jews and the Roman Catholics. Bishop Nevill suggested that those ministers should be invited who were recognised by the Government under the Marriage Lioense Act. The Rev. Mr Maxwell said that many of those present that day could not make it convenient to come again. The Roman Catholics could speak out m another way. The motiDn for adjournment was then put, and lost by a large majority, oniy three voting in favour of it. Bishop Nevill then proceeded to express his opinions regarding the questions before the meeting. He had heard several members say that they were in favour of the amendment rather than the original motion, only for the practical difficulties presented by the latter. There might be difficalties in the way of the proposal for giving religious instruction as fuily and as completely as all could wish. Only a few clergymen might avail themselves of the opportunity. But even if such were the case, he held that such would be a great advance on the provision made by the Government. He did not think that those gentlemen could have reflected upon what they said when they remarked that they would vote for the motion rather than the amendment because of the difficulties. He considered the difficulties only partial and imaginary, and he hoped those to^whom he was referring would change their minds. He was willing to admit there may he here and there religious-minded people who did give instruction jto their children 3 but the meeting should bear in mind they were disoussing a question that had relation to the country generally. If they told him that ihey had a well-educated population he would reply that they had not yet seen the fruits of the system which had prevailed hitherto. If they looked at the case of the majority of parents in this country they would see that they could not give religious instruction to their children, for I various reasons, which he proceeded to point out. They might just as consistently say that every mau should teach his children grammar t and everything else. In the case of religion the responsibility of parents was to some extent deputed to the ministers, and such was war ranted by Scripture. He could not quiet his conscience unless he raised his voice on every possible occasion for the purpose of requesting that some opportunity should be given to ministers of religion to go to those of their own denomination and train them up. He thought there were a great many parents in this country who really did wish that their children should receive religious instruction, yet confessed that they themselves were unabl« to teach them. If they could not at present get all they wanted yet they should ask for it, as thereby they would be in a better position to demand it on another occasion. He considered that if a secular system of education were adopted it would be necessary for them to have more Police and more Industrial schools, aucl he asked them most solemnly and seriously to let neither visionary nor theoretical grounds interfere with a full earnest consideration of this question of what they s^all do for the children of this country. As he had the opportunity of addressing a number of ministers of religion with whom he did not often come in contact he urged upon them that they should give ex' pression to their opinions on this subject, as by doing so they would encourage a great many other cities in New Zealand. If Presbyterian ministers, Wesleyans, and all others were to unite in reference to this matter, the Government would not be able to resist such a weight of feeling. Professor Salmond saw great practical difficulties in the way of the proposals contained in the amendment. Supposing a committee chose a certain half-hour every day for religious instruction, Bishop Nevill might go on Monday, Dr Stuart on Wednesday, and the priest on Thursday, and so on ; or five ministers might be there every day. As far as he could see, he thought theie was extreme unlikelihood of such a system being carried out, and he referred to

his experience in England, for the purpose of slowing that it probably would not work welL All ministers were fully occupied. What they were really coming to was this, which was the only solution of the matter— that was, that the State would take in hand the secular education of the people, and that churches would hare to waken up to a sense of their resoonsibility towards the youth of the land, and have to take more vigorous steps in that direction than they did at present. Sunday-school teaching was very good, but some of thase who were teaching such schools required to be taught themselves. He thought there was »n immense waste of power in connection with the churches. Why should their fathers and mothers, and grown-up people, absorb the whole time of the ministry on Sunday ? What, did he want two sermons preached to him every Sunday ? If they were to be satisfied with one sermen instead of two, there would be an immense saving, of power, and time would then be available for the instruction of Bible classes and teaching the young. From the necessity of the circumstances, the State would have to vigorously take in hand the secular system, and the churches would require to waken up, and devise means for grasping the religious problem. He felt inclined to accept the compromise, and considered the proposals contained in the amendment 2S impracticable. The Yen. Archdeacon's amendment was then put, when there voted— Ayes, 5 ; Noes, 11. ,It w<«j therefore rejected. Mr Lewis's amendment was then put, when there voted seven in favour of it, and an equal number against it. The Chairman gave his casting vcte against the amendment. , The Rev. Mr Davis, in reply, said that -he heartily appreciated the feeling that had been expressed in regard to the religious education of the young. He then again proceeded to express himself very strongly in favour of secular education, and concludod by saying he was bound, from strong patriotic feeling, to welcome this compromise as approaching his own view. The original motion was then put, and uar tied, 12 voting in favour of it. This concluded the proceedings.