THE GLOBE. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1880. THE BY-LAW COMMITTEE IN REPLY.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 2072, 14 October 1880, Page 2

THE GLOBE. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 14, 1880. THE BY-LAW COMMITTEE IN REPLY.

The answer of the by-law committee to the elaborate hut unconvincing memorandum of the Tramway Company on Monday night was as complete as it was to the point. Wo have already commented on the salient points of that memorandum, so no more need he said except to express our pleasure at finding the by-law committee perfectly equal to the occasion. There are, however, one or two features in the discussion which took place demanding attention. First, let us notice the singular pertinacity with which some members of the Council shut their eyes to the fact, over and over again demonstrated as clearly as noonday, that the Council, as a body, know nothing whatever of their legal position as regards the Tramway Company. One Councillor objected to further legal advice being taken, believing that the agreement and concessions were sufficient. Simpleminded Councillor Gapes ! How would the astute Chairman delight to have you in the post of Chairman of the Tramway Committee once again. Everything would then progress as smoothly as it did whilst the late Works Committee—for, alas, too brief a period—held the reins of power with regard to the tramway. Fortunately, however, for the interests of the city, though perhaps not so for the Tramway Company, that happy family disagreed, and the result has been that by slow degrees the Council is being awakened to the fact that they know nothing of their real position and powers. Yet, in face of this, Councillor Gapes thinks no more information is required. But Councillor Taylor’s speech, as reported, was the most extraordinary of all. He thought that the committee did not understand their position. Well, we think the public will agree with us that the committee did understand their position, and that of the general hearings of the question, a good deal too well for the Tramway Company to he able to draw them off the scent. “ The subject,” says Councillor Taylor, “ had not been approached in a spirit of equal fairness.” What did Councillor Taylor want ? The committee merely, in the most temperate and convincing language, dealt with, and demolished the specious arguments advanced by the Tramway Company. They did not go a step outside the manifesto, hut simply replied to it. Where is the unfairness in this ? It is somewhat difficult to account for Councillor Taylor’s new-born enthusiasm in the direction of the Tramway Company. Not many meetings ago no one was more energetic in denouncing their proposed occupation of Cathedral square for some purpose. Yet now we find him imputing unfairness to a public committeee who, in the interests of the citizens, are simply putting a plain statement on record in answer to a document from the Tramway Company. We cannot hut heartily endorse the recommendations of the Committee that no further concession ho granted till the relative positions of the Council and Tramway Company are definitely ascertained. That this obvious and common-sense course should be opposed by some members of the Council is, to say the least of it, most extraordinary. The Council, were it to listen to these gentlemen, would go on blindly granting powers to the Tramway Company without knowing in the least what their effect would be, and the result would not bo difficult to fortell. Therefore, it is necessary, not alone that the Council should be fortified with legal opinion as to their status and powers, but that that opinion should be an independent one. The bylaw committee have taken the opinion of a legal firm of very high standing in the city, and whose opinions always carry the greatest possible weight. This opinion wo should like to see placed at the disposal of the Council. It was not done so earlier because there was some idea that the opinion having been obtained by the committee for their own guidance, was, to a certain extent, a private opinion, and at all events it was, we believe, not paid for out of the funds of the ratepayers. But the opinion, it is understood, deals with the several points of the questions now in dispute very exhaustively, and would throw a good deal of light on the matter, so that we hope that now the committee will bring it before the Council, and enable the ratepayers to see actually what is the position of affairs.