AUDITORS’ REPORT.

Thames Guardian and Mining Record, Volume I, Issue 91, 24 January 1872, Page 3

AUDITORS’ REPORT.

We, the undersigned auditors appointed at the annual meeting of the congregation of St. George’s Church, on the 15th inst., having audited the books and balancesheet, together with the receipts produced to us by Mr Honiss, and we find them correct. We must, however, draw the attention of the meeting to the omission of the amount due to Mr Workman on account of the action brought against him by Mr Gold, lie having paid the balance between the amount of the judgment and that paid him by the churchwardens, which is £177 14s lOd. We would also suggest that in future no accounts be paid without the same having been first submitted to the Vestry and passed. F. Lipsky. W. 11. Oi.duey.

Some discussion arose as to the money yet owing to Mr Workman, and it was explained by Mr Honiss, the churchwarden, that the money certainly was owing, but that simply a balance-sheet of cash received and expended was presented, and that it did not show the assets and liabilities at all. No doubt such a statement could be brought forward if the members wished for it.

Mr Bowden proposed, “ That the Auditors’ report be adopted as far as the words ‘£l77 14s 10d.’ ”

Seconded by Mr lIoGG, pro. forma. Mr Jefferson proposed, as an amendmend, “ That the auditors’ report be adopted as far as the word ‘ correct.’ ” Seconded by Mr Mason, and carried. Mr Jefferson proposed that the balancesheet, as read, be passed. Seconded by Mr Mason, and carried. Mr Mason said that he thought the next business was to appoint auditors for the ensuing year. He begged to propose “ That Messrs Newberry and Baseley he appointed auditors for the ensuing year.” Seconded by Mr FitzGiisbon. Mr Power proposed “ That Mr F. Day and Mr Airey be the auditors.” Seconded by Mr llogg. The amendment was carried.

Mr Honiss next explained that he regretted that he could not bring up a balance-sheet of the building fund, ns time would not allow of it. lie could only state that over £9OO had been paid in, and over £I,OOO had been drawn out, and there was still a balance of £2 10s to the credit of the fund in the bank. The money had been paid in by various persons, he did not know by whom, but had evidently come from somewhere. Mr Lush stated that he held slips for an amount of £593 19s, for monies paid in ; but he did not know who had paid any more in. A discussion arose as to the small amount realised by the oratorio. Mr Airey explained, as a member of the Oratorio Committee, that they had done their best. It had been a failure, and they were sorry for it. He could say no more. The Chairman ruled that this was no subject for tbe consideration of tbe meetingj and stopped the discussion. Mr llogg wished simply to know what was still due on tbe church, and what means were at their command for liquidating the debt? Mr Honiss stated that Mr M'Coll’s contract was for £l,lOO, and £l5O extra for the spire. Of this, £3OO had been raised on a mortgage on the building, £IOO of which had been already received ; the balance of £2OO was to be paid this week. Mr M'Coll had received £927 on account of work done, and the balance of this account was to be paid out of the £2OO still due of the mortgage money, and the money which would be received for the parsonage, about to be sold. No offer had been received yesterday, but it will be seen that if the house brings £125 this sum will be sufficient to pay all dues, leaving only the mortgage of £3OO as a debt on the church.

Air Power moved “that the present auditors take steps to bring forward a statement of assets and liabilities connected with the old and new church, and that their report be published.” Seconded by Mr llogg, and not carried. Mr Fit/, Gibbon mentioned that the spire of the new church ought to' be painted before the scaffolding is taken away, and would like to know how the monev could be raised to do it.

Mr Honiss said that no doubt the people would subscribe liberally at the opening of the building, and enable them to have it done.

Mr Tyler then drew the attention of the meeting to the late action of the choir in arrogating to themselves the right of balloting for the admission of members into their midst. Such a thing as the ballot in matters of this sort was quite unprecedented, and, as he had heard, had only lately been introduced into the choir. He also had been given to understand that it had been introduced for a certain purpose, namely, that of excluding a certain person from the choir, and lie denied the right of any one connected with the choir to exclude any person from lending their assistance towards the object for which choirs were formed, namely, the leading of the congregation in singing their praises at divine service. Such a thing must create great dissatisfaction amongst any congregation, when people set themselves up as judges of others. He had heard, and on good authority, that one person had been blackballed by four members of the choir after she had been asked by the Incumbent to become a member, and that never having been informed that such was tha case she attended a practise meeting, at which meeting she was told before the whole of the members present that no one who had been objected to could sit amongst them. He thought that such a thing, if it had occurred, was an insult to any one, and as such was deserving of great condemnation. He would beg leave to move the following resolutions :

1. “That in the opinion of this congregation, the practice lately adopted by the choir of balloting for persons applying for admission thereto is opposed to Christian charity and forbearance, and calculated to create dissention among the adherents of the Church.”

2. “That in the future such persons shall be admitted as members of the choir as are approved of by the Incumbent in point of character, and in point of ability by the conductor, and balloting shall wholly cease. These were seconded by Mr Eaitudy. Several members of the congregation present agreed with the tenor of the resolutions, and considered that a great evil existed in allowing such a thing as ballot to exist in an institution of the sort.

Mr Sandes, as a member of the choir, strongly objected to balloting for members, and wished to know by whose authority such a thing had been introduced. He had been absent at the meeting when it was proposed, or he certainly would have opposed it to the utmost of his power. He asked Mr Power if he could give any information about the matter.

Mr Power said that the Incumbent had said lie thought the choir should have some voice in the election of members to their body, and had sanctioned the ballot.

He (Mr Power) had submitted the names on the night in question, and thought that some one had informed the person blackballed of tbe fact. ' Mr Airey thought that election by ballot was not at all correct. He. had not boon present the night the voting took place. After a good deal of discussion the resolutions were put to the meeting and carried unanimously. Mr Tyler said that that point being settled, he now would propose another resolution. Ho considered that a great wrong had been done, and iie thought that such amends should be made as lay in their power. Whoever was to blame in the matter, it did not signify who, was deserving of great censure, and he would move the following resolution : —“ That this congregation hereby records its protest against the manner in which the lady refused admittance to the choir was apprised of the fact; and is of opinion that the ladyiu question should have been informed of her rejection before she had an opportunity of attending the practice of the choir after such rejection.” Seconded by Mr Raithby. The Chairman explained that he was under the impression that the lady had been informed of the refusal to admit her, and he thought she was there with the knowledge of such fact, or he certainly would not have acted as he had done.

The motion was put and carried. A vote of thanks to the chairman terminated the proceedings.