The Nelson Evening Mail. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1874

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume IX, Issue 303, 8 September 1874, Page 2

The Nelson Evening Mail. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 8, 1874

_.. ; 0k looking over the " Citizens* Rull " a for the City of Nelson, we were mucb gratified to find tbat tbe community ot ~* 'tbe town ol Nelson is so well to do tbat three only of those "whose names appear .. on tbe roll are set down as beiog en ; - titled to but one vote, all tbe rest beiog 7 in a position to claim from two to five. But, on re-perusing the list in connection with the Act, we .have been driven tb the more startling, and far less pleasing, h \ conclusion that, if tbe burgesses tbereiu V,"^p_ebiioned be permitted to record th« nam ier of vit.s set against their names, any election in which ihey take part il will be Altogether invalid, tbe quaijfica tion having bean based opon tbe value to sell ot tbe rateable property of the town instead of npon the annual value, ss distinctly provided by tbe Act, as we. _ will, proceed to show by citinu 'certain portions of it. In Section 48 Hjlbe-^qaalification of burgesses is laid (iowbia* follows:-- --.-: '.^Etetyftwan ot the f ullage of 21 years wbo, on the 80th of June in any year, shall

be in occupation, or be the owner, of any rateable property within any borough, and shall on that day be, or have been, under this Act, liable to be rated for such property as such occupier or owner respectively, shall be entitled, to be enrolled in that year, according to the provisions hereinafter contained, upon the burgess roll of the boroughi and, being so enrolled, shall be a burgess theieof, -iaod': entitled to vote in all elections of Councillors for the botough occurring while such ro'l shall be in force, according to the following scale, th tt is to say, if such rateable property, whether consisting of one or more tenements, be rated upon as rateable value of less than £50 he shall have one vote; if such rateable value amount to £50 and be less than £100, he shall bave two votes; if it amount to £100 and be less than £150, he shall have three votes; if it amount to £150 and be less than £350, he shall have four votes; and if it amount to. or exceed, £350 he shall have five votes.'- 1 - Here then is stated the qualification. Now let us turn back to the interpretation clause, where we find the following:— '•The expression 'rateable value,' when used with reference to rateable property, shall mean the annual va'ue of any such property appearing in a valuation for the time being in force under this Act, and on which value rates made by any Council are to be made." Lest there should b« any doubt on tbe subject, we will go on to Section 203, where it is provided: — " Ths Council of every Borough shall, once at least in every year, and may, from time to time as they see fit, in manner hereinafter mentioned. I make anl levy ratee, to be called general rates, equally upon all rateable property : wiih - | io such borough, and no rate, made in any j one -ear shall exceed tbe amount of one shilling in the pound of the annual value of such property," &c From the above it is perfectly clear tbat the annual value of tbe property occupied or owned, and not its value to sell, ia to be the basis upon which tbe number of votes allowed to each ratepayer is to be calculated, and yet we find that of the 641 whose names appear on the list, no lees than 356 are set as entitled to the maximum number. In other words, we are asked (o believe tbat 356 of the Nelson ratepayers are occupying or owning property of the value of £350 per annum and over, while there are only tbree whose rentals are less tban £50. We have carefully looked through tbe "Municipal Corporations Act, 1867" and all tbe succeeding Amendment Acts and can find in tbem nothing to contravene tbe provisions of tbe sections quoted above, and can therefore come to but one conclusion, namely, that the multiplicity of votes set against the large majority of the names on the roll is altogether illegal, and that < if they be all recorded oa Thursday next, the election will be nail and void. We have another objection to urge against the printed roll, namely, tbat it is not drawn up in accordance with the form specified in the eighth schedule as provided by the Act. Section 61 says i that, after the list bas been revised and certified by the Mayor and assessors, it 44 shall be forthwith delivered to tbe Town Clerk and he shall forthwith cause tbe names tbereon to be copied on a roil, arranged in alphabetical order, of the surnames in the form contained io, and with tbe several particulars required by, tbe eighth schedule, and shall prefix to every name on such; roll a number, and shall, if the Council' order him to do so, cause a sufficient number of copies of such roll to be printed," Ac. In order to show to what extent those instructions have been carried out, we give below a copy of the schedule referred to, together with a few samples of tbe manner in which tbe roll has been compiled:—

It will be seen by the above that the eighth schedule has not been complied with, indeed, column "Electoral division and district thereof V has been altogether omitted from tW roll ; however, thatis not of so much consequence, but it is important that the name of tbe voter should be given in full* aud the property, upon which his claiS. is based, designated, but in some cases, as will be seen, both have been left oet al-

together. How coubi such a question as tho following, which is provided for by Section 35 of the "Municipal Corporations Amendment Act, 1871," be put to the individual who is described on the roll as "Biglow":— " Are you the person whose name appears as A.B. id the burgess roll now in force for this borough, being enrolled therein in respect r of property, described to be situated in [Here specify the street or other place described in the burgeae roll]?" But Mr Biglow, about whose baptism there appears to be a doubt, and whose property seems to be nowhere in particular, is entitled to three votes. With such a roll as that before ua we shall be greatly surprised if some serious complication does not arise out of the ecsuiDg election. [Since the above was io type, his Worship the Mayor has handed to us the following legal opioioo, received from the solicitor to the Corporation :— - In reference to the question as to the construction of the « Municipal Corporations Act." which you have submitted for my opinion, I have to inform you that I am of opii ion that the expression, "rateable value," used in that Act, means the annnal value of the property rated, and that the number of votes to which ratepayers are entitled is regulated by the annual value of the property, and not according to its value to sell. Ia « onducting the ensuing election, I think you must assume the new Roll to be correct, and act according to it, and allow to each voter the number of votes therein assigned to him without inquiring upon what basis it has beeu formed. Henry Adams.

W — 00 50 J> — > (0 co Co Ol 2.*y 5" 2 2 _K- p p p o^ If. a < ' I g- 5» -d, «■ P o it' **■ SB <B w | g* go So - a 9g* . • I s, s S 8 mm I ■. I •ssg. - -■ | f ' as t 1 w»w 1 p g ~p » m » ca b B f SES b 2 oj _3 's s 2. r _»?«» » 8 ° _J O-Cfß* * 3. Mr? ft" 0 ° » •o «, a P f_ _ PS" £ I S. « S 2 § p a 2p 3 3 c_ 5? ra 5p p *2 G° <g .«. -"g? ---3- ■ « o, ;»» ►_;• •S 533S 33 § . P (T) ft> a ~\ b I ' ■ 5. **? O c* P g, ? & b ' ' a ■< ; Q Oft J-h o* D CD a <t> m o £.» cr • tr i