66

made it his request to the Provincial Council that the oversight should be remedied
by striking out the two first words. This the Provincial Council declined to do,
the consequence of which must be, that the sick and destitute (unless through a
transgression of powers) would remain deprived for a time, which cannot as yet be
defined, of the relief which would otherwise be afforded them. The Superintendent would remind the Council that the omission of these words would not in
any way affect the late disallowance of the City Council Election, and that the
retention of them, if acted up to, would merely be the cause of inflicting needless
hardship.

The Superintendent recommends that the first item under the head of
"Special Works" under schedule C be amended by restoring it to the form in
which it was transmitted by the Superintendent to the Provincial Council, namely:
—"City of Auckland, main sewer, £3000." To this the Provincial Council have
attached as a condition, "To be paid to the City Council for appropriation." The
Superintendent believes that the only effect of this addition will be disappointment in the object of the vote, and an indefinite retardation of improvements
which he is most desirous of carrying out.

The Superintendent is aware that the refusal of the Provincial Council to
appropriate the fore-mentioned sum otherwise than by the intervention of a City
Council arose from his own disallowance of the late City Council Election. Yet
he is at a loss to perceive how he could have acted otherwise. Comparing the
City Council Amendment Act with the original Act, he is unable to find any
authority for the Election of City Councillors. He would direct the consideration
of the Council to the following passage from the opinion of the Provincial Law
Officer, already laid before the Council:

"No provision is contained in this Act as to the constituency by or from
amongst whom the Council of nine persons is to be chosen, nor is any time fixed
for the election of its members; whilst all the provisions of the other Act (excepting the four mentioned) relate to the election, &c., of the Council of Seven. And
if we can by any force of construction infer that it was contemplated that all the
regulations applicable to the election of the Council of Seven were for the future
to be applied in electing the Council of Nine, then the election of the last month
ought not to have taken place until the last Wednesday in [February,] 1856, as
will appear from section 10 of the first of the two Acts.

"The election of members for the City Council shall take place on the last
Wednesday in the month of February in the year 1854, and on the last Wednesday
in the month of February, 1856, and every subsequent year."

There appears to be an imperfection in the City Council Amendment Act.
For that, of course, the present Superintendent is not responsible. Referring
also to the 70th clause of the Constitution Act, the Superintendent is of opinion
that he has no power to introduce an amended Bill; otherwise, although he believes
the City improvements might be carried on more economically and effectively by
other means, he would readily have yielded to the wishes of the Provincial Council and have given his best endeavours to the legal formation of a City Council.
Being disabled by law from doing so, he recommended to the Provincial Council
two modes of providing an immediate though temporary substitute—either by
vesting the power of expending such moneys as may be appropriated to city
improvements in a small number of persons having professional acquaintance with
the duties which would devolve upon a Board of Works, or by appointing as
Commissioners those 15 persons who were originally declared by the returning
officer to have been duly nominated for election to the City Council. Neither of
these propositions, however, appear to have attracted the favourable consideration
of the Provincial Council.

With regard to the Amendment now about to be proposed by the Superintendent, he would observe that he recommends it on grounds of a very different
and far more important character.

In the Bill sent down to the Provincial Council, the 15th item under
the head Miscellaneous in schedule C was worded thus: "City of Auckland,
£2000." This has been altered by the Provincial Council to "Auckland City
Council, for general purposes, £2000;"—appropriating that sum to a different
service, in contravention, as the Superintendent believes, of the 25th clause of the
Constitution Act, which declares that:

"It shall not be lawful for any Provincial Council to pass, or for the Superintendent to assent to, any Bill appropriating any money to the public service,
unless the Superintendent shall first have recommended to the Council to make
provision for the specific service to which such money is appropriated."

The Superintendent recommends that the original words "City of Auckland"
be restored in place of the words "Auckland City Council, for general purposes,"
and most strongly urges the Provincial Council to adopt this amendment.