CITY COUNCIL.

Evening Star, Issue 3640, 22 October 1874, Page 3

CITY COUNCIL.

There was a special meeting of (ho City Council this afci nioori. at which v e»u 'present the Mayor, Councillors Walter. Mercer, Prosser. BBh,- Isaac.*, Grant, and Carroll The bond between the Ceuucd and the Church property tenants in Princes strict south. Si respect to the appointment of arbitrators, > c., was submitted Jor adoption. A resolution appro* iiig of the bond, which the Mayor explained was iu strict accordance with the agreement of August 25, last, between the Church trustees and the Corporation, was opposed by Crs. Fishand Isaac, who contended, that before the Council took any further steps, tke proposed bond should have been referred* to Messrs Stout at d Sievwright, the tenant’s solicitors, for approval or suggestions o: amendment. The Mayor replied that the Reserves Coxmnitt.e would have been'going outside their duty had they submitted the bond to the tenants, without it having been first approved of by the Council; and if.such a course had been adopted, Cr. Fish would have been the first toobject to it. Withdrawal of the motion for referring the bond to the tenants’ solicitors having been suggested, the Mayor made an observation, which drew from Cr. Fish the remark that he had the-temerity- to -second such a foolish amendment. "i be Mayor expressed his surprise at Crs. Fish and Mercer supporting sncl\ an “unconstitutional proceeding” as the amendment involved. After some smart passages between the Mayor and Cr. Fish, Cr. Mercer declaiming against his name being dragged in unnecessarily, and Cr. Carroll characterising the whole affair as a splitting of straws and a senseless discussion, the amendment was carried by a majority of one, Crs. Fish, Mercer, Isaac, and Prosser .supporting, and Crs. Grant, Walter, and Carroll voting against it. The fading of, a second deed having been objected to by Crs. W alter and Carroll, a personal discussion followed, ip, the course of which the Maymr said he had never seen such factious ’opposition shown during his connection with the Council, and added, addressing Cr. Fish, “I apply that"distinctly to you, sir.” Thereupon that Cr. told the Mayor that “if he (the Mayor) had lost that sense of propriety which,ought to regulate his actions, be would soon reduce the Council to the level ef a bear-garden.” Under the Mayor’s threat of adjourning the Council unless be held his peaee, Cr Fish resumed his seat, and business was proceeded with. A motion similar to that previously carried was adopted in reference to the second bopd, by the same yote. , Cr. Fish gave notice, for next meeting, of a motion asking the Council to affirm that the use by the Mayor of the words “factious opposition,” as applied to himself, is ‘Ndxsprcjerly and calcinated to. bring the Council into contempt.”