BOROUGH COUNCIL.

Kumara Times, Issue 1487, 4 July 1881, Page 2

BOROUGH COUNCIL.

The ordinary fortnightly meeting of the Borough Council was held at the Town Hall on Thursday evening ; present—His Worship the Mayor, J. O'Hagan, Esq. (in the chair), Crs. Pearn, Pollock, Burger, Campbell, Galland, Simmons, Home, and Barnett. [The following is the conclusion of our report of the proceedings :—-] ■ MR SIMMONS' POSITION. Cr. Campbell now brought forward his motion concerning Mr Simmons' position in the Council by moviug—- " That the Town Clerk be appointed to proceed under the ' Municipal Corporations Act,' part clause 97, and summons before the Resident Magistrate's Court in Kumara, George Simmons', sen., holding the office of Borough Councillor in the Borough of Kumara, calling upon him to show cause why he should not be adjudged to be ousted of the same, he having ceased to be a burgess, his name not being on the Burgess Roll." He said the question must be settled by another tribunal. Whilst there was considerable doubt in the minds of some persons on the matter, he considered that as Cr. Simmons' name was not on the Burgess Roll when it was signed, he (Cr. Simmons) was individually disqualified. It now remained for the Council to carry out clause 97. Cr. Simmons had been a very energetic councillor, no doubt; but he had himself to blame for the position in which he found himself—it was his own fault. Mr Simmons was continuing to occupy his seat in the Council as he considered illegally. No petitioncan alter this. He concluded by again reading the motion.

Cr. Pearn seconded the motion. He did so for the reason that if Cr. Simmons had a right to be here at all, it should be a.legal right. The Mayor again read the Borough Solicitor's opinion and the petition from certain ratepayers.—[The former appeared in our last issue.] The petition was as follows : To the Mayor and Councillors, Borough of Kumara. Gentlemen—We, the undersigned ratepayers of the Borough of Kumara, respectfully request that your honorable Council will allow no proceedings in Court to be taken by or on behalf of the Borough Council with the object of ousting Councillor Simmons from his seat as Councillor, for the following reasons, viz:— Ist. That having the case tried in court will necessitate going to law expenses, for which there is no occasion. 2nd. That a fresh election would be required if Councillor Simmons was ousted, the expenses of which means a further encroachment on the funds of the Borough. 3rd. That should any person feel aggrieved at Councillor Simmons continuing to act as councillor, he or they are allowed by the "Municipal Corporations Act" to take proceedings at their own cost and responsibility.

4th. That until ousted by the Court, all

the acts of Councillor Simmons in connection with the Borough Council are perfectly legal. In proof of which we refer you to clause 63 part V. of the " Municipal Corporations Act." And your petitioners will ever pray. [Signed by 30 ratepayers.]

Cr. Pearn wished to know which the Council was discussing—Mr Campbell's motion or the petition $ They could not discuss two questions at the same time. Cr. Campbell: No ; they could not entertain two things at the same time. Mr Simmons said he intended to call a public meeting, and get to know the opinions of the ratepayers. If they thought he should resign, he would place his resignation in their hands. He said he was a poor man; if the case be taken to Court, he should have to resign, as he could not afford the costs of testing thexjuestion of his position. As for Cr. Campbell telling them that, it was his own fault—[turning to Cr. Campbell, Mr Simmons said]—" It is a lie, and you know that it is."— Cr. Pollock drew the attention of the Mayor to the words uttered by Mr Simmons. Cr. Campbell moved that they be taken down. The Mayor called Mr Simmons to order, and asked him to withdraw the words. Mr Simmons then withdrew the words, and said he would call a public meeting, and if the ratepayers thought he ought to, he would retire. Cr. Barnett said that as no one had complained of Cr. Simmons except a member of the Council, he did not see why the Council should take action in the matter. Cr. Burger thought the ratepayers were satisfied with Cr. Simmons. He should oppose the motion. The Mayor stated that that was not the correct thing. Cr. Campbell rose to reply. He had no personal ill-feeling or animosity towards Cr. Simmons. The question was—ls Cr. Simmons legally qualified to sit in this Council ? He considered that if it were allowed, the whole Council . would be a complete farce. He discarded the imputation of pocketing the penalties. The sooner the question was settled the better. The motion was carried on the voices. JNOTICES OF MOTION. Several notices of motion which had been handed in by Mr Simmons were then produced. The Mayor commented strongly upon the neglect of the Town Clerk to* enter the notices which had been placed on the table at the close of last meeting in the usual manner; it was not the first occasion that he had to complain of 1 this conduct. He concluded a very violent harangue by proposing a vote of censure npon the Town Clerk. The Town Clerk asked to be allowed to explain. He said it was no wilful neglect on his part. Having received the Borough Solicitor's opinion that Mr Simmons was no longer a councillor, he thought the notices would lapse. The Mayor was proceeding in the s >me strain of censure, when Cr. Barnett rose to a point of order. He would ask the Mayor if he accepted the Town Clerk's explanation. The Mayor: Yes. Cr. Barnett: Then why do you mence again to attack the Town Clerk? Cr. Campbell moved Council do now adjourn." The motion was seconded, but lost on a division.

The notices were being proceeded with, when several Councillors rose to leave.

Thus the Council adjourned,