THE NEW MUNICIPAL BILL.

Evening Star, Issue 4148, 13 June 1876, Page 3

THE NEW MUNICIPAL BILL.

Yesterday the City Council devoted three hours to considering the new Bill, and up to the time of adjournment had reached clause 192. It was decided, that the number of polling places should be four, namely, one for each ward. The hours between which the polling booths should be open were decided to be 1 a.m. to 6p m. It was also resolved that the Mayor should not, as chairman of the Council, have a deliberative as well as a casting vote. It was resolved that the new Bill should not contain any provifor imposing fines en members for resigning their offices. On clause 6, proposing to divide the City into six wards, there voted four for the motion, and four to to continue as at present. The Mayor : This is a most important question, and as I have to give my casting vote I will state my reasons for voting in favor of retaining four wards. I fail to see that the division of the City into six wards would be attended with any material advantages. The feeling of the Council has been to expend money without regard to any paltry jealousies in regard to the different wards. The division of wards will not increase the representation. Three members for each ward represent their wards tolerably well. These being my views, I will most certainly vote in favor of four wards.

At tq-day’s sitting Cr. Reeves expressed the belief that had a full Council been present yesterday tho question of dividing the * ity into six wards would have been carried. Jie was not present yesterday, and was astonished to find that the Mayor had Vwed against six wards, although in committee he had never expressed himself opposed to them. The Bui proposed to give six wards in order to afford better local administration. If the principle of local administration was to be thrown over he should go in for abolishing tho whole of the wards and making the City one ward. He moved that there be six wards, as provided for in the Bill. ,

The Mayor ruled the notice to be out of order.

- Cr. Leary gave notice of motion that be would ' move pt the next meeting of the Council that the Bill be re-committed for the purpose of reconsideration of sections 5 and 6.’ Had the Mayor not moved Cr. lleevcs’s motion to be out of order he would have seconded it.

Cr. Reeves stated that when the Council had completed the Bill, and before it was passed as a whole, he would take exception to the Bill. • .

( r. Isaac moved that the Council adjourn or a week.

The Ma\or pointed out that this would simply be throwing the Bill over for another year. ♦

; Cr Isaac explained that he wished the •Bill put back for another year. Their solicitors told thefn that if they wished the Bill passed through the Assembly this session they would have to rush it through the Council, and Councillors would thus be deprived of fairly considering the measure. The motion was lost by the Mayor’s casting vote.

On danse. 27 being re-considered, Cr. Isaac, with a view of preventing personation, moved that there be only one poll-ing-place at the election for Mayor, which was agreed to.

(Left sitting.)