LOCAL BODY EXPENSES.

Shannon News, 26 February 1926, Page 2

LOCAL BODY EXPENSES.

A case of outstanding importance t<> members of local bodies as affecting their travelling expenses was heard in the Hamilton Magistrate's Court last week when the Audit Department (Mr. H„ T. Gillies) sought to recover from Henry Arthur Lurman, a former chairman "of the Qtorohanga County Council, the sum of £ll. 16s. The defendant, who was represented.by Mr. Maekersey, paid into Court £8 Bs, but denied liability. The circumstances, explained Mr. Gillies, were that for the year ended March 31st, 1924, the Audit Office tagged the. balance-sheet of the Otorohanga County Council in regard to the payment By. the Council of £2 2s per meeting to the members, each of whom was surcharged for the amount over 12s 6d per. meeting. All the members except Mr. Lurman paid the amount surcharged, but Mr. Lurman refused to do so. t - ' Mr. Gillies contended that under the Public Revenues Act the surcharge could : be questioned only if it was manifestly unfair. He relied on the decision of the House of Lords whieh recently upheld the English Audit Department in its. claims against the Poplar and BethnalJ Green Poor Law Guardians who paid their employees a greater sum than the amount allowed bylaw. For the defendant Mr. Mackersey submitted that the decision of Mr. Justice Williams 'expressed the view that members of local bodies were entitled to a reasonable amount per meeting. The same provision, said Mr. Maek'ersey was re-enacted in the Act of 1920, and thus the decision became The Magistrate, Mi*. Wyvern Wilson, reserved his decision.