REVISION OF THE BURGESS ROLL.

Thames Advertiser, Volume VIII, Issue 2126, 20 August 1875, Page 3

REVISION OF THE BURGESS ROLL.

His Wobshif tho Mayor, and Messrs Carpenter and Pulleine; as Assessors', held a Court yesterday at the Council Chambers for tho revision of tho Burgoss List.

Mr H. Mcllhone claimed to bo placed* on the Burgess List on account of tho Bendigo Hotel, Pollen-street, of which ho was in occupation. It appeared that Mr Mcllhone went into occupation in May last, but had never been rated for the property, and tho question was whether ho was liable to bo rated on tho 20th of June. The following is tho section of clause 48 on which the. dispute aroso :— " Every person of the full ago of 21 years who, on tho 20th day of June, in any year, shall be in occupation or bo tho owner of any rateable, property within any borough and shall on that day be or have been under this Act liable for such property as such occupier or owner respectively, shall be entitled to bo enrolled in that year according to tho provisions hereinafter contained upon the. Burgess List of tho Borough, and being so onrolled, shall be a burgoss thereof, [and entitled to vote in all elections of Councillors for tho Borough occurring whilo such shall be in force, according to tho following scale," &c. f &c. After some discussion, Mr Mcllhone asked for an adjournment in order that he might be represented by counsel, This was granted, and After tho adjournment, Mr J, E. Macdonald appeared for Mr Mcllhone. Ho said that Mr Mcllhono ,was undoubtedly the occupier of the Bendigo Hotel on tho 20th of Juno, and was undoubtedly liable to be rated on that day, and on that they based their claim, Tho question was, what was meant by being liable. It might be contended that all rates having been paid up to that day, that ho was not liable, but that was not the correct reading of the Act He was undoubtedly liable to be rated if a rate had been mado. It could not bo contended that, because the Borough had levied all tho rates thoy could, and that they had been paid up to that time, that thereforo ho was not liable to be rated, but ho would undoubtedly be liable for special rate. His contention was that he was liable to bo rated, supposing a rate could bo made. That was the construction of the words as they stood, but there was apparently a clerical error in tho clause Ho referred to the Highway Boards Act, showing that where this clause was nearly copied word for word, there was a transposition, which made tho matter perfectly clear. He would admit that to mako this transposition was taking a liberty with tho Act, but not he thought a greater liberty than the Court was entitled to lake He referred to tho ruling in Victoria in a similar instance regarding the Mining Companies Act. Ho contended that in cither case, whether tho transposition was made or not, Mr Mcllhono was entitled to be on tho roll, for ho fulfilled all the conditions of the 48th clauso. Ho was in occupation, and as such was liable to be rated if a rate were made.

Tho Mayor said he believed there was an error in the clause, for tho intention clearly was that any man liable to be rated for property was entitled to a vote on it, but the Act did not say so. There were conditions which wero not fulfilled. Ho was not rated. Mr Macdonald contended that although Mr Mcllhone was not rated, owing to tho accident of no rato haviDg been levied, ho was certainly liable to bo rated if a rate had been made. His Worship said that it took two months to le.vy a special rate, so that even according to his own showing he was not in occupation long enough to be liable for it before the 20th of June. Mr Macdonald said that so far as his contention went it would bo tho samo if he only entered in occupation on tho 19th of June, tho only question was whether Mr Mcllhone was in such occupation as made him liable to be rated, and tho accident of the corporation not having made a rate was no _ reason why Mr Mcllhone should be disfranchised. The meaning was that he was in occupation on tho 20thof uune, and was liable to berated whenever a rato was made. Mr Carpenter asked how tho Borough Council was to acquire any knowledge of a change of occupants under the Act. In this case Mr llendy, if he had only paid a'portion of the rate, would have left tho incoming tenant liable for the remainder. Mr Macdonald explained that the burgess list being made up from the ratebook, the clerk was undoubtedly right in putting on Mr Hendy's name and leaving out Mr Mcllhone's, and it was for any person who was then entitled to be on the roll to apply to have his namo placed there, as Mr Mcllhone had done. Only names which appeared in the defaulters' liet were omitted from the burgess list. Mr Pulleine said that Mr Mcllhone's name was on tho defaulters' list.

Mr Macdonald said not with regard to tho Pcndigo Hotel. Mr Pulleine said that tho matter was argued that morning, and they wero of opinion then that unless a person had paid all his rates ho would bo disfranchised,

Mr Macdonald read tho clauso to show that he could not bo disfranchised if ho had paid his rates on any properly. It read not" all rates payablo by him," but "all rateß payablo by him in respect of such property." A long argument ensued, in which it transpired that there was a difficulty, on account of Mr Hendy's name b:ing on tho burgoss list, in respect to this proporly.

Mr Macdonald said that could not affect Mr Mclllione's claim. They had nothing to do with Mr Heudy at all, even if by tho accident of not being objected to his nnmo was retained on tho list improperly. If, as was shown, Mr Mcllhono had complied with tho three conditions of tho 48th section of tho Act, ho was entitled to bo on the Burgess 8011. Tho Mayor, said that his opinion was that Mr Mcllhono was not rated nor was ho liable lo'bo rated for the property on the 20th of Juno. Another man was liable, and paid tho rales, and Mr Mcllhono had never been rated for the property at all, nor was ho liablo for any rate on tho 20th of Juno.

Mr Macdonald contended that being in occupation, ho was liablo to bo rated, and after some further discussion on tho matter tho Court withheld its decision until to-morrow (this morning). 'J hero was n second claim by Mr Mcllhono, in which ho claimed to bo placed on tho roll in respect to half an allotment in Rollcstou-strcct, of which ho was owner and occupier. It appeared that John MoMulleu was rated for tho whole nllotmont, aud paid the rate.

._ Tbo Mayor said llio satno question nroso iu Ibis application ns in tbo last. It appeared that Molfullcn had paid the rate for tho wholo allotment, and mado no objection. Mr Macdonald said that if it turned out that MoMulloa was only Mollhono's duinmy,it would account for McMullou's lying quiescent.

Mr Mcllhono said that it was merely a matter between McMullen and himself; in point of fact, ho had himself paid the rate to tbo collector. ,

After somo conversation, it was decided to consider this caso with tho other.

Michael O'Hairo applied to have his name retained on tho Burgess Roll. It appeared ho was a few days late in paying his rates, and so was placed on tho defaulter's list, but ho said tho fault was not his, as ho was absenlfrom the Thames at Ohinemuri..

Tho Court took limo to consider tho case, aud consequently tho Mayor said that ho had taken advice, and found that no defaulter could be restored to tho Burgess Roll. Ho regretted it in this instance, as it was shown that Mr O'Hairo was not in fault, but as tho law stood, they could not go outside of it, and tho application was disallowed,

James Cooks mado application to havo his namo rolained on the roll, from which it had been excluded in conscqueuco of non-paymont_ of rates on crtain allotments in Baillie-strect, for which ho was assessed.

Mr Cocks did not appear to support tho application.

Mr Dean explained that Mr Cocks had leased those allotments to a man named Wooderson, and did not consider himself bailee for tho rates. Ho had paid tho rates on all his other properties. Mr Fleming stated that Mr Cocks was rated for tho allotments in question. His Worship said that, according to .tho strict reading of tho Act, thoy had no other courso but to disallow tho application,

Application was also mado by Abel Rowe and Georgo Baird, but they did not appear, and the applications wore disallowed.

Tho Court adjourned until 11 o'clock this morning,