HC Deb 06 August 1896 vol 43 cc1674-6

Existing officers of the Corporation now elected annually or otherwise shall continue to hold office without election during good behaviour. No person shall be eligible to any office in the gift of the Corporation who has been an alderman or councillor of the city within twelve months preceding the election to such office.

MR. HARRINGTON moved to leave out Clause 25 on the ground that it would prevent a member of the Corporation from been elected as Lord Mayor. A member of the Corporation who wished to become Lord Mayor would have to resign his position and remain outside the Corporation for 12 months before the election day.

MR. T. M. HEALY

thought that it was desirable that members of the Corporation should not be eligible as candidates for offices in the gift of the Corporation, such as the offices of Town Clerk and City Marshal. He therefore could not consent to the omission of the clause.

MR. JOHN REDMOND

hoped the clause would be omitted. The had been no abuse in the Corporation under the existing state of things. The clause provided that no one should be eligible as a candidate for a post under the Corporation who had been a member of the Corporation within 12 months of the election. There might be on the Corporation a gentleman specially qualified to act as City solicitor, but this clause would preclude him from being appointed.

MR. CARSON

took objection to the first part of the clause because it would attach the condition of permanency to the position of Corporation officials who had hitherto been elected annually. A Corporation was not a permanent body quoad the members who composed it. Its members were liable to be turned out if the electors thought that the work of the Corporation had not been efficiently performed. That being the case, the Corporation ought to have full control over the officials charged with the duty of carrying out its wishes, and such control might be impaired if those officials held office permanently,

MR. FIELD

expressed the same opinion. The clause would make the officials of the Corporation its masters when they ought to be its servants. It could not be said that under the existing system any official of the Corporation had ever been capriciously evicted.

MR. KNOX

said that there were precedents for the proposals of the clause with regard to the Corporation officials both in English law and in a Provisional Order Bill recently passed relating to Armagh. He was himself rather against the plan of giving a long tenure to officials, but, having regard to the precedents, he thought the clause ought to be accepted. The clause in other respects was most salutary. It was nothing short of a public scandal that members of the Corporation should be constantly canvassing for official posts, and the clause would prevent jobs.

Question put: "That Clause 25 stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 88; Noes, 129.—(Division List, No. 385.)

Clause 26,—