THE PRINCES STREET ARBITRATION.

Evening Star, Issue 3809, 10 May 1875, Page 2

THE PRINCES STREET ARBITRATION.

• We give the conclusion (unavoidably held over on Saturday) of our report of the meeting on Saturday

Cr Fish said he was not going to remain silent during this discussion, though some might think he should. He was astonished at what had fallen from some of the speakers words which showed that after appointing judges to arbitrate in a matter they would try if possible to get out of it, Saoh conduct could only be likened to being equal to impropriety. He agreed with the other Councillors that the arbitrators had attempted to charge snore than they were to get, but he would tell the Council and the public the whole facts of the case, so that the arbitrators, not there to protect themselves, might have something offered as an excuse for their conduct. On Nov. 12, Messrs .Birch and Hawkins were appointed arbitrators for the Corporation : the letter iufonnulg them of that fact reached them bn March 30, and the strangest part of the matter was that they did not receive the note specifying the terms on which they were to act until they had actually sat in deliberation on the case. had the deed prepared by the Corporation solicitors placed in their hands before receiving the letter from the Mayor or Town Clerk notifying their appointment and the rate of remuneration. It was a strange fact also, that me letter, when received, was dated March 22. How did this lapse.of eight days occur? The arbitrators say this:—We were appointed after the deed was in our hands, and we did not know, or were not supposed to know, the rate of remuneration until after we had entered on task. He (Cr. Fish) said this was a shuffle, but the blame of the matter must be thrown on the want of tact and ability shown by the Mayor or the Town Clerk in not sending the letter and getting a reply accepting the terms two months earlier. Such was the want of business tact shown by the gentlemen the Councillors appointed to conduct their business. The reason had been offered that the terms were kept back, because, if the arbitration did not go on, the Corporation would have the \|hole of the fees just the same; but that idea was a fallacy, as they were appointed without prejudice if the matter fell through. The legal i osition, however, of the arbitrators was unassailable, though their moral one was in a very dirty state, and he thought the Council should exercise great caution before ■ the risk of paying LSOO or L6OO more 'than the extra L2OO for the sake of pursuing a righteous vengeance. He (Or. Fish) felt so strongly on the subject that he called on the arbitrators and urged them not to ask more, than 100 guineas each, as their good names were of more value than the extra L4o£or LSO.each,

«ad om of them oonaanted; but it appears sinoe Aat some_ influence has been whtefn i llß6lo ®*® Mr Bastings, the fifth I }iS? UBt l b6 * M not come SSiSd for he wM “o* SffiSL by t | e ! oo '»°U but by the four other titled to claim 118 m P° Bit i°n be was ea* fiSSS3n^»s asrtjs^^w<sL£t Cr - thought it was all nonsense to say so The Council voted 600 guSTSTniI five arbitrators—at 100 guineas e£h W nearly onoaton** Ct fT U SyK, t aar jtsys defended the Mayor and Town S! imputation that the bungle was caused by delay . on their parts. The tenants were in a hurry to get their job °vor; and theirsd&itors .S£ their arbitrators several dava hJIm the City solicitors the deed. sssarcaspas? mss SSS“Bf¥ u -ss«VSfai SiSESaSSSS ssaa^siSS caSrf”SS'mTO& Mercer ™ **•■*- ?"• Oounotob. On. Reeved W& t IS , BIS)n h t mat^ r, The Tmww Or "“ron were chosen. in foma^ng^eletter Itett^a^Vlh^e 1 te t t^a^V l h^ e not owing & him! arbitrators was it was understood the deed washed “