Mr. H. Watters, seconded by Mr. John McKee, moved that a committee consisting of Messrs Slaven, Hall, Jeffrey and the mover and seconder be appointed to strike standing committees.
Mr. C. H. McGregor, seconded by Mr. J. J. Hall, moved as an amendment that Messrs. Hobart, Watters, Petrie, Mackenzie and McGregor receive the appointment. The amendment was lost by eight votes to four.
Mr. D’Avignon moved the adoption of the minutes as printed in the Pharmaceutical Journal for February.
The Chairman--I object to that, as part of them recorded there not true. I refer to page 117 of the journal where it says: “The President rose to a question of privilege referred to some statements made in the World with regard to his connection with the Pearen matter.” I object to the manner in which that is put in.
Mr. Lewis, Registrar, at the President’s request, read the minutes as recorded in the minute book as follows:
“The President arose to speak on a matter of privilege, and explained to the council the action he had taken in the matter of the attempt at alteration of the Register of Apprentices by J. M. Pearen, and read to the Council the letter in the World of February 8th, and claimed the statements therein were not in accord with the facts, and he thought it was due to him that the Council should not allow them to be uncontradicted.”
Mr. Davidson--Then I infer that the report in the Journal with that exception is correct?
Mr. D’Avignon, seconded by Mr. Watters, moved that the minutes of last meeting of the Council be accepted as read, the inference being that they were read from the minutes and not from the Journal.
The Committee on Standing Committees reported as follows:--
Executive and Finance--Mackenzie, Petrie, Slaven, Hall, Hobart.
Education--Jeffrey, D’Avignon, Watters, Petrie, Slaven.
By-laws and Legislation--Hall, Hobart, D’Avignon, McKee, Lawrence.
Infringements--Mackenzie, Watters, Hobart, Lawrence and Saunders.
Mr. Mackenzie thought the whole Council should act on such an important branch as the Infringement Committee, but Mr. Watters pointed out that this was contrary to the constitution, which limited the number to five.
Mr. Hall and Mr. Hobart seemed to favour the amendment of Mr. Mackenzie, stating that it was difficult to cover the districts in any other way without the appointment of a private prosecutor or detective.