The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, March 7, 1912. NOTES AND COMMENTS.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIV, Issue 1016, 7 March 1912, Page 2

The Manawatu Herald. Thursday, March 7, 1912. NOTES AND COMMENTS.

We have been asked to explain the position as to who is entitled to vote at the licensing election on Tuesday next. The franchise is exactly the same as is the case in a parliamentary election, and every elector whose name appears on the electoral roll for the Otaki electoral district is entitled to record a vote. Each elector is entitled to vote for any member of those nominated up to five. Eight candidates have been nominated and to vote for more than five makes the voting paper invalid. The same polling booths will be used at this election as for the Parliamentary candidates, excepting Foxtou, where the booth will be situated in the Masonic Hall, aud the same polling hours will be observed, viz., from g a.m. to 7 p.m. Voters will cross out the names of candidates for whom they desire not to vote. Mr F. D, Whibley has been appointed deputy returning officer for Foxtou. As we have previously pointed out, it seems a pity that the local governing bodies should be put to the expense of an election, in view of the fact that all the committee can do is to see the licensing law is fairly administered. The fact remains, however, that the electors have a duty to perform on Tuesday next, aud that duty is to elect a licensing Bench, The gentlemen nominated represent the whole constituency, and there should be uo difficulty in making a suitable selection of five out of the eight candidates offering.

The Rev A. C. Randersou, m.a., had something to say on the duty of truthfulness during the course of his sermon iu the Levin Presbyterian Church on Sunday last. When men, he said, “became members of the supreme court of our national life—our Dominion Parliament —their acts as such become public acts, so that the Christian Church is entitled to pass them under review, to test them by Christian standards, and to approve or condemn them as they reach or fall below the standard of Christian truth and honour. It therefore becomes my duty to state my Christian conviction that lies of a very grave character have been acted during the past week in our public life — at the seat of Parliament iu Wellington. I have nothing to do with the judgment of individuals. I do not concern myself with motives. But I cannot omit to state that these repudiated promises, that we have seen dishonoured, whatever may be the political result I care not —have lowered the standard of public life, sent out an influence iu favour of uurruthtulness to the length and breadth of this laud and done a grievous wrong to the sacred cause of truth, with which, as a church, we stand for ever identified.”

Some time since, in an article dealing with local municipal affairs, we mentioned the fact that the business of the Council was not cut and dried in the Town Clerk’s office as is the case with certain boroughs, and that our city fathers were men of initiative and business acumen, who discussed and settled the ratepayers business on its merits, There is a point, however, that is receiving the attention of a number of municipal bodies at present which is also worthy of consideration by the local Council, i.e., that reports and agenda paper of business to be transacted by the Council should be in the hands of the ratepayers representatives at least a day prior to the meeting to enable them to give such matters mature consideration. It is impossible to get a clear grasp ol important business it details are submitted only when the Council meets. The advantages ol mature reflection are obvious. At a meeting of the Stratford Borough Council the other night Cr Faget is reported to have said, “1 wish these reports were circulated sooner. There’s a great amount of detail here, and we should have had it two or three days sooner to properly understand it.” Again at a meeting ot the Wanganui Borough Council on Tuesday evening Cr Muir entered a strong protest against committee work in general and in particular against the manner in which committee reports are presented to the councillors. He contended that councillors should have at least two days to consider them before being called upon to pass them. The idea of bringing the reports down on the night ot the Council meeting was, he held, altogether wrong. Cr Muir, and he was supported by Cr Robinson, expressed his determination not to agree to any report which had not been circulated two days before the meeting, and thus give councillors time to consider the report and make suggestions. Yet again, at Taihape a few weeks ago a somewhat similar discussion took place amongst Borough Councillors after the reading of the Klectrical Engineer’s report. With a view to due consideration being given to reports one councillor suggested that it would be better that these documents should be laid on the table when the Council met, so that their contents might be more readily understood by councillors when the time for discussion arrived. We feel sure the Town Clerk would be only too pleased to fall in with this suggestion if adopted and Councillors would thus be afforded ample

time to give careful and full consideration to all matters of importance.