HOKITIKA BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Hokitika Guardian, 23 August 1923, Page 2

HOKITIKA BOROUGH COUNCIL.

MR EVANS RF.SIC.NS. Mr 1). ,1. Kvans, who was elected a member of the Hokitika Borough Council in April last, yesterday wrote the Town Clerk resigning his seat as t Borough Councillor. Mr Evans informed a “Cuardian

1 e par ter that the resignation was the outcome of some seemingly complicated legal issues which had arisen at the time, of his election, and the shortest cut to sever tin* gordian knot, and make t il plain sailing, was to resign, and if the ratepayers thought well of it, to start de novo.

It will he recalled that after Mr

Evans’ election a petition was filed to cmitest his election, that petition was withdrawn, but a second petition war lodged in its place. When Iho hearing came on tit the Magistrate s C.ouit Iho counsel for tin* petitioners withdrew the ease, stating he was satisfied with the documents he had soon th • Mr Evans' election was in order

Evidently there wyre^lt hose who were nut sati.-lied, and certain representations appear to have been, made to tiie Audit, Department, An officer of 'the Department made enquiry into the matter locally, and ultimately the position was fully discussed. As there appears to be some doubt in regald to the legality of the situation, it, has been thought well to clear up all occasion for doubt or difficulty, in the t,h<» matter, by tendering the resignation.

In connection with the matter it suggested that the ease of Mr Evan* is analogous with that of Air Mine, Mayor cl Te Kniti, who encountered a technical difficulty and resigned and was re-elected, as the shortest course to satisfy the demands of all. In regard to the resignation of Mr Evans he stated that liis renoinination will he for the- ratepayers to suggest, ff the elector* indicate such a desire, Mr Evans is prepared to stand again and meet all comets. In the event of contested election taking place Mr Evans said he would tit once meet the electors on the public platform, and give any further explanation that might be desired in regard to bis resignation.

The contention of the Audit Department is that Mr Evans was interested within the meaning of Section It) of the Municipal Corporations Act R)2;l. as a shareholder in a company of not less than twenty members in certain services rendered hy that Company to the Borough Council prior to the date of Mr Evans' nomination, hut then not paid for. 'I here thus, according to the Bine case at Te lxuiti existed a condition of uncompleted contract, affecting Mr Evans' qunlificntinp as a councillor. I lie Audit Office theieup.on suggested the simplest way out the difficulty was to resign, and it so wished, seek n*-election, a- Alt* Evans is not now a shareholder in the company referred to. Air Evans also had the benefit of the opinion of Air .1. A. .Murdoch in regard to the position, and in regard to tile position of councillor. Air Evans acted in good faith throughout, in accordance with a fair interpretation of the law. Air Alin dish's opinion on the matter is given as follows :- “Be Alunicipal Corporations Act 1920, .Section -10. - Adverting to the opinion gitett hy me under your instructions on tite interpretation of the above Section prior to file recent election of l outicillors for the Borough of Hokitika, I have now to point out taat the decision of His Honour, The Chief Justice, in the case ‘Todd v. Commissioner of Stamps” has beet) over-ruled l,y the New Zealand Court of Appeal at a recent sititng in Wellington.

• As I h;ithe grounds ol my opinion to you on the dictum of The t hief Justice in the above ease it will be seen that the view T held is no longer law.

”1 am unaware whether the decision of the Court of Appeal is to be reviewed by the Privy Council hut under iiie circumstances it would he unwise to await such a contingency. “In the event of your deciding to resign your office as a result of the Appeal Court decision 1 have further to advise that you are now clearly eligio!e for re-election.”