THE CORPORATION OFFICIALS.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2318, 8 September 1881, Page 4

THE CORPORATION OFFICIALS.

A special meeting of the City Council was hrld on Wednesday in reference to the dismissal of the corporation officials. Present—His Worship the Mayor, Ors. Vincent, England, Taylor, Cuff, Lambert, Ayers, Hulbert, Thomson, King, and Treleaven. The Mayor read the requisition, asking that the meeting should be called, signed by Ore. Hulbert, King, Lambert, Ayers, Taylor, and England, the object being to consider the dismissal of the staff for the purpose of carrying out Or. Hulbert’s resolution. An apology from Or. Bishop was read for absence on account of ill health, and asking for leave of absence for a month. The leave asked for was granted. , , Or. Hulbert said the meeting was odled by the wish of himself and others who voted for hi* resolution at last meeting. Ho then asked the Mayor to explain what had been don<3 in regard to that resolution, an explanation being deemed necessary. The Mayor said he had taken the necessary steps to give effect to the resolution. He signed all the notices except that to the town clerk, as to whom there appeared to Jim to bo a legal difficulty in the way, as he had been appointed by minute of 1 he Council, instead of by agreement, as was rhe case with the other officers. He, therefore, refrained from acting on his own authority, and consulted the city solicitor, to whom he gave the documents connected with the town clerk’s appointment. [Documents in question read.) Ho received a reply from the city solicitor, as follows : ‘‘To his Worship the Mayor. Sir,—The terms of the Council’s engagement with the town clerk are exceedingly vague. It seems, however, tolerably clear that it was for a year certain, and from year to year as long as the Council and Mr Haskins should please, and that no express provismn was made for its being determined. We are of opinion that at the commencement of each year a new engagement was made to continue until the end of such year, and in the absence of any usage or custom aa to determining such agreement, a reasonable notice must be given on either side of the intention so to do, and that such notice must expire with the current year of the hiring. It seems doubtful upon the authorities what length of notice be given in the absence of agreement, and that its sufficiency is a question for the decision or a jury, though it is stated, on high authority, that a quarter’s notice given a quarter of a year before the expiration of the year or hiring would in all cases be am ply sufficient, and we are of opinion that the Council will be quite safe in giving such notice. .. , ~ It appeared by this letter of advice that the notice must be given clear three months before the end of the year, but as the town clerk’s appointment was dated the 2nd December, it vtas too late to do so, and he accordingly desired to consult the Council before proceeding further. Or, Hulbert —Did you give the notice m accordance with those terms ? His Worship—No, because as I have said 1 was advised too late, not having received the legal opinion till the sth of September. Or. Hulbert—l contend that it was your duty to give the notice from the date of the resolution. .. . „ , ~ , The Mayor—l do not thmx I should have been justified in doing so under the circumstances. After some further remarks bearing on the date of the town clerk’s appointment, Or. Hulbert said that without wishing to censure the Mayor, he regretted that his Worship had not carried out. the spirit as well as the letter of the resolution passed at last meeting. It was urged at the time the desirability of giving three months’ notice. It was desired that such notice should be given, if legal, in order to afford time to carry out the amendments deemed necessary in the departments of the staff. But the notices actually given to the officials were not sufficient to meet the end contemplated. He regretted that the Mayor had not acted differently. He could not pretend to question the opinion of their legal advisers, but at any rate he thought the notice ehonld have dated from the time of the Oouncil passing the resolution. The Mayor said he had no option but to aot in accordance with the resolution, and this, ho contended, had been done. Or. Hulbert thought the Mayor might have understood the wish of the Council os to the notice, which was plainly expressed. Or. Thomson pointed out that there was really nothing before the Council. He could see no good result likely to arise out of a desultory discussion like that now proceeding. Or. Taylor, to put the Council in order, moved—“ That this Council disapproves of the action of the Mayor in not carrying out the resolution of this Council passed at last meeting.” Or. King seconded the motion. He conaidered the Mayor had not carried out the spirit of the resolution. He did not blame his Worship so much as the departmental committee, who had shirked their duty. Or, Ayers —Did you discover the difficulty as to the town clerk when you gave the other notices ?

The Mayor—Yog, at the time when, as I have stated, I saw the agreements, but there was no agreement with the town clerk, hence I had to take advice.

In reply to Or. Lambert, The Mayor said it was the wording of the solicitor’s letter drew his attention to the discrepancies in the dates. Or. Halbert had no hesitation in saying that a resolution of a majoiity of the Council had been absolutely barked. Further, what the Mayor had done was illegal, as to the other officials, seeing that he had only partially carried out the Council’s resolution. He heartily supported the resolution. His Worship pointed out that some discretion was allowed him in case of any difficulty or doubt, and with regard to the notices he had given, he saw no difficulty, as the agreement clearly said, “a month’s notice or a month’s pay.” Or, Cuff supported the action of the Mayor, and considered his explanation ought to be accepted os straightforward and fair. He quite agreed, however, that the notices given were not altogether legal, seeing that the Council knew that the resolution directing notices to be given was directed at the Town Clerk, and that it had so far missed the mark.

Cr. Hulbert called the speaker to order—he should use arguments, not make assertions. Or. Cuff oonoluird by remarking that he entirely supported the Mayor, who had evidently acted for the best, and with a conscientious desire to do his duty. .Or, Thomson said it was too true that nothing succeeds like success. Had the Mayor acted so as to meet Cr, Halbert’s motion, the latter gentleman would have applauded him to the echo, but unfortunately a little date hod crept in and upset their calculations. With regard to the remark that the resolution of the Council had been barked, he took that charge as equally levelled at himself, and he should be very sorry to believe that any member of the Council would burke one of its resolutions. But as a matter of fact there had been nothing of the kind. The resolution directed that legal notice should be given, and the Mayor had taken the necessary steps. It had been said he was a great sympathiser with the town clerk. Well, all he could say was that he fully sympathised with anyone holding that office, and he should always do his best to see that that officer received fair play. That, indeed, was all ho hod fought for. The departmental committee had nothing to do with the matter, and had therefore not neglected any duty. No doubt the supporters of the resolution would have liked the committee to take the matter out of their bands, but they knew too much for that—those who had made the mess must deal with it. In conclusion, he quite agreed with the Mayor, and had he been in his place he would have placed himself entirely in the hands of the solicitor.

Or. England could not -agree with the motion before the Council, as he believed the Mayor had acted in good faith. He would rather see a resolution giving three months’ notice to the officials all round. He did not believe in the legal opinion, and would take bis share of the responsibility. Or. Ayers expressed himself satisfied with fee Mayor's explanation, though ho regretted the result had not been more satisfactory. Or Lambert spoke in a similar strain. Or. Hulbert wished it to be understood that in the statement he had made he had no intention of personally reflecting on the Mayor. Or. Treleiven would not censure the Mayor, but if it took five days to get an opinion from their solicitor it was time a change was effected therein. The Mayor fefc hurt that such a resolution as that before thjm should have been proposed. He could mt suppose that his word was doubted, but locking at the time he had served at that Board, he thought the resolulution was not a gracious thing. Or. Hulbert had said that he did not wish to insinuate against any one, but he distinctly said that the resolution of that Council had been

barked, and if that were *o, he (the Mayor) must have done it. He was exceedingly sorry any such remark should have been made, as he had endeavored to act for the best in this matter to the very utmost. In reply to Or. Halbert, The Mayor said he should bo glad to offer every facility to amend the "notices given or issue new ones. ' . , Or. Taylor replied, and’osked leave to withdraw his resolution. Or. Thomson opposed the withdrawal. Or. King, the seconder, also objected. . Or. Hulbert desired to move an amend? ment—“ That the matter should be relegated to a committee to consider how the Council # resolution should be carried out." j Or. Cuff pointed out that it was no amend* ment on Or. Taylor’s motion. The Mayor ruled that the proposed amend" ment was not in order. The resolution censuring the Mayor was then put, end unanimously rejected.Or. Taylor moved—“ That three months notice be given to the City Council staff of officials.” The motion was not seconded. . . A question then arose as to the position which the Council now occupied with reference to the officials who had received notices. , . , gjjjOr. Hulbert requested the Mayor to rule whether his own action wes legal. The Mayor repeated that he had acted as ho believed in accordance with the resolution of the Council. Or. King said it seemed Or. Hulbert wanted the Mayor to pass a vote of censure on himself. After some further talk, Or. Thomson suggested that the best way to get out of the difficulty was to seek the advice of an independent solicitor, and abide by such advice. He moved that Mr George Harper be consulted. Seconded by Or. Ayeis, and earned. Or. Hulbert moved that the notices already issued be withdrawn, pending receipt of the legal opinion. The resolution was carried. This concluded the business, and the Council then adjourned.