PARISHIONERS’ MEETING.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume V, Issue 1419, 18 May 1886, Page 3

PARISHIONERS’ MEETING.

The adjourned meeting of parishioner of St. Stephen’s Church wan hold in the Church schoolroom, Burnett street, last evening. There was only a small attendance, and the Rev. E. E. Otway presided. The minutes of the last meeting having been, read and confirmed, the Chairman explained that the present meeting had been called for the purpose of obeying churchwardens and vestrymen. iso to il the rules of the Synod bearing upon the election of those officers. Mr St Hill said that before proceeding with tho election of office-bearers ho thought the mooting should have some information with regard to tho financial prospects of the parish. The Chairman said tho matter referred to by Mr St Hill could not be dealt with.

Mr St Hill enquired if the meeting was a special one. The Chairman replied that tho meeting was not a special one, but was callod for tho purposes ho had already stated. Mr St Hill did not see how they could

exclude finance from tho discussion. They might elect office-bearers, but would leave them without the means of cany, ing on the work of the Church*. Tho Chairman intimated that after the election of officers he would have no objection to take other business. Mr St Hill essayed to speak again, but was interrupted by the Chairman, who said he wished tho business to bo taken In order. The Chairman nominated Mr G. Jameson as clergyman’s churchwarden.

On the motion of Mr W. Bland, seconded by. Mr W. S. Bean. Mr F. T. Mayo was elected parishioners’ chutchwarden.

Mr Mayo proposed, and Mr Jameson seconded —“ That the number of vestrymen be seven. ”

Some discussion In reference to the motion followed.

Mr St Hill enquired if there was any particular object m reducing the number from ten to seven, and wanted to know if the vestrymen if last year had quarrelled. Mr Mayo thought seven good men would be found better than ten indifferent workers.

The Chairman remarked that any parishioner had a right to ask a question, but It was not necessary for the person addressed to supply an answer or to furnish the reasons that induced him to propose any particular motion. The motion was carried, and the Chairman then asked the meeting to nominate vestrymen. Messrs Littlecote, Bland, Maine and Townend were nominated.

A number of other gentlemen were named as vestrymen, but declined to act.

After some discussion of a desultory character, and a prolonged delay, Messrs Paul, H. Gates and Thomas were nominated, and, with the four gentlemen previously named, declared duly elected. Mr St Hill referred at some length to the question of pow rents. Many parishioners were under the impression that their subscriptions were really rents. This was a mistake, and as the money was paid under a misapprehension, he would like to know If tin Church would follow a business-like and moral course and return the money- He thought a straightforward charge for pews would be more satisfactory to the parishioners and more profitable to the Church than the present system. He moved —“ That the pew rents be fixed on the late basis, i.e , £1 Is for the first seat taken by each person, and 10s for each other seat taken by the same person.” It had been said that the abolition of rents would increase the

offertories, but as a matter of fact congregations of 200 or 300 now contributed less than one penny a head. There was a beggarly collection of three penny pieces, and a large majority of the donors appeared to regret there was not a smaller coin.

Mr W. S. Bean seconded the motion. Mr Jameson said he would support the motion if the churchwardens wore given power to reduce the charges to impecunious parishioners. Mr St. Hill would agree to the suggestion if the roll of rates and list of Impecunious persons were kept open for public Inspection. A long discussion followed, and ultimately Mr Littlecote moved as an amendment —“ That seats be allocated to the subscribers to the Church fund, as hitherto.”

Replying to Mr Dimant, Mr Pritchard gave the meeting to understand that the allocation of seats bad been a financial success.

After a prolonged conversational discussion, the amendment was put to the meeting and declared carried, but on being put as the substantive motion was lost.

Mr Pritchard proposed— *■ That LI la each be charged for the first two seats taken by one person, and that 10s each be charged for any additional seats taken by the same person.” The motion was seconded by Mr Bean, and after a brief discussion carried.

On the motion of Mr St. Hill, seconded by Mr Jameson, a vote of thanks was accorded to the Chairman.

The Chairman having appropriately acknowledged the compliment pronounced the Benediction, and the meeticg closed.