ROAD BOARD ELECTION.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume III, Issue 407, 6 September 1876, Page 2

ROAD BOARD ELECTION.

On Monday last, according to announcement, a meeting of Ratepayers took place in the Court House Gisborne, to elect a member for the Poverty Bay Highway Board in the room of Mr Tutchen, resigned. Mr C. Ferris, chairman of the Board took the chair, and briefly explained the object of the meeting: and after some little discussion Mr Webb proposed “ That Mr C. D. Berry is a fit and proper person, to become a candidate for the vacant seat at the Poverty Bay Highway Board.” This was seconded by Mr Morgan and, there being no other candidate, was put to the meeting and carried. The chairman declared Mr Berry duly elected, and that gentleman briefly returned thanks, assuring the Ratepayers that it would be his endeavor to promote their interests, as much as lay in his power. The chairman said that the question of raisingthe rate, fixed at the general meeting iu July last, had been mentioned to him, but he would shortly say that if the Ratepayers desired any subject of that kind to be considered, a special meeting would have to be called for the purpose. He had entertained doubts as to the power of the Ratepayers to take the step proposed, which could only be done by rescinding the former resolution. But he had satisfied himself by obtaining Mr Wilson’s opinion on the matter, which he read to the meeting, as indicating the legality of such a course if the meeting desired. Mr Brooke Taylor dissented from that view, and stated emphatically that the Highways Act conferred no power of the kind. Mr J. W. Johnson said he thought it was a mistake that the rate was struck so low, but as it had been done, be thought it was a mischievous precedent for the minority to attempt to rule the majority. The rate had been fixed at a large meeting ing of Ratepayers after due consideration ; and it was hardly likely that the country settlers would attend another meeting even if called. Mr Dufaur denied that dueeonsideration had been given to the subject; on the contragy, the Ratepayer.” were taken by surprise, for the resolution had been made and carried in less than ten minutes, and no one had heard that such a reduction in the rate was to be considered. He would therefore move “ That a meeting be held at a future date in accordance with the provisions of ‘ The Highways Act, 1874,' to consider the advisability of increasing the rate from 2) per cent, to 5 per cent.”

Mr Webb would second the resolution. He was glad to find that he was not alone in the opinion that the resolution to reduce the rate to 2.) per cent, was a matter of surprise! He had read of the annual meeting while in Napier, and thought that Mr Taylor’s sensible suggestion, to postpone the meeting to the following day should have been acted on. With regard to the resolution now before the meeting, it endorsed the opinon he had expressed at two or three annual meetings, namely that due notice should be given of the subjects liked to be discussed; any motion to reduce the rates was a popular one, but he thought the Ratepayers had been led into a decision without that due deliberation which so important a subject required. Mr Parsons moved an amendment “Thata future meeting be not called.” Mr Johnson seconded it, and after some discussion was put to the meeting. The chairman then put the original resolution, and declared it to have been carried. Mr Parsons then attempted to move a resolution that the meeting be called for that day six months, but the meeting broke up, on the understanding that a requisition would have to be made requiring the chairman to call a meeting in terms of the Act.