Sect. 22. Quarterly Meetings and Proceedings of Council; Committees. 22.-(1.) The rules in the Second Schedule shall be observed (a). (2.) The council may from time to time appoint out of their own body such and so many committees, either of a general or special nature, and consisting of such number of persons, as they think fit, for any purposes which, in the opinion of the council, would be better regulated and managed by means of such committees (b); but the acts of every such committee shall be submitted to the council for their approval (c). (3.) A member of the council shall not vote or take part in the discussion of any matter before the council, or a committee, in which he has, directly or indirectly, by himself or by his partner, any pecuniary interest (d). (4.) No act or proceeding of the council, or of a committee, shall be questioned on account of any vacancy in their body. (5.) A minute of proceedings at a meeting of the council, or of a committee, signed at the same or the next ensuing meeting by the mayor, or by a member of the council, or of the committee, describing himself as, or appearing to be, chairman of the meeting at which the minute is signed, shall be received in evidence without further proof (e). (6.) Until the contrary is proved, every meeting of the council, or of a committee, in respect of the proceedings whereof a minute has been so made, shall be deemed to have been duly convened and held, and all the members of the meeting shall be deemed to have been duly qualified; and where the proceedings are proceedings of a committee, the committee shall be deemed to have been duly constituted, and to have had power to deal with the matters referred to in the minutes. (a) See this schedule, post. (b) This provision will apply to county councils. As to the appointment of joint committees by county councils or quarter sessions, see the Local Government Act, s. 81, ante, p. 155, and as to the proceedings of such committee, see s. 82. As to the standing joint committee, see s. 30, ante, p. 66. By the Local Government Act, s. 28, ante, p. 64, the county council shall have power to delegate, with or without any restrictions or conditions, as they may think fit, any powers or duties transferred to them by that Act, to any committee, except the power of raising money by rate or loan. The delegation of powers to a committee will not deprive a county council of the right to exercise any power which the committee might have exercised under the delegation. Huth v. Clarke, 25 Q. B. D. 391; 59 L. J. M. C. 120; 63 L. T. (N.S.) 348; 38 W. R. 655; 6 T. L. R. 373. (c) The acts and proceedings of the standing joint committee need not be submitted to the county council for their approval. (Local Government Act, s. 75 (16) (ƒ), ante, p. 146.) Every committee of a county council is required to report its proceedings to the council, but to the extent to which the council so direct the acts and proceedings of the committee shall not be required by the provisions of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, to be submitted to the council for their approval. (Local Government Act, s. 82, ante, p. 157). It seems that the act of the committee will not be invalid merely because the approval of the council (where necessary) is not given until after the act has been done. Firth v. Staines, 13 T. L. R. 394. (d) Where, by a resolution of a town council under s. 15 (4), ante, a salary is attached to the office of mayor, a candidate for that office is disqualified under the provision in the text from voting for himself, as he has a pecuniary interest in the matter. Nell v. Longbottom, [1894] 1 Q. B. 767; 63 L. J. Q. B. 490 ; 70 L. T. (N.s.) 499. It has already been pointed out that a member of the council is disqualified by any interest in a contract with the council. (See s. 12, ante, p. 252.) But there are certain excepted interests which do not disqualify, and the provisions in the text will apply to these. (e) As to the taking and signing of the minutes, see Sched. 2, r. 12, post. Bye-laws (a). Sect. 22. NOTE: council to 23.—(1.) The council may, from time to time, make such bye- Power of laws as to them seem meet for the good rule and government of the make borough, and for prevention and suppression of nuisances (b) not bye-laws. already punishable in a summary manner by virtue of any Act in force throughout the borough, and may thereby appoint such fines, not exceeding in any case five pounds, as they deem necessary for the prevention and suppression of offences against the same. (2.) Such a bye-law shall not be made unless at least two-thirds of the whole number of the council are present. (3.) Such a bye-law shall not come into force until the expiration of forty days after a copy thereof has been fixed on the town hall. (4.) Such a bye-law shall not come into force until the expiration of forty days after a copy thereof, sealed with the corporate seal, has been sent to the Secretary of State; and if within those forty days the Queen, with the advice of Her Privy Council, disallows the bye-law or part thereof, the bye-law or part disallowed shall not come into force; but it shall be lawful for the Queen, at any time within those forty days, to enlarge the time within which the byelaw shall not come into force, and in that case the bye-law shall not come into force until after the expiration of that enlarged time. (5.) Any offence against such a bye-law may be prosecuted summarily (c). c. 55. (6.) Nothing in this section shall interfere with the operation of section one hundred and eighty-seven of the Public Health Act, 1875; 38 & 39 Vict. and that section shall have effect as if this section were therein referred to, instead of section ninety of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1835; but nothing in the Public Health Act, 1875, shall be construed as having restricted the meaning or scope of the Municipal of Sect. 23 (6). Corporations Act, 1835, or as restricting the meaning or scope this section, with respect to prevention or suppression of nuisances (d). (a) As to the application of this section to county councils, see the Local Government Act, 1888, s. 16, and notes, ante, p. 42. By s. 85 of the same Act, ante, p. 162, the provisions of sub-s. (1) of this section, in so far as it gives power to a council (whether town council or county council) to make bye-laws regulating the use of bicycles and tricycles, are repealed. (b) It will be observed that the bye-laws are of two kinds, one for the good rule and government of the borough, and one for the suppression of nuisances. The distinction is important, for, as noted below, the two kinds are differently confirmed. The leading case on the subject of the reasonableness of these bye-laws, is Kruse v. Johnson, 14 T. L. R. 416; 42 Sol. J. 509, W. N. (1898), 48, in which it was held by Lord RUSSELL OF KILLOWEN, C.J., Sir FRANCIS JEUNE, P., and WRIGHT, DARLING and CHANNELL, JJ. (MATHEW, J., dissenting), that the byelaw of a county council that "no person shall sound or play upon any musical or noisy instrument or sing in any public place or highway within 50 yards of any dwelling-house after being requested by any constable or by an inmate of such house personally, or by his or her servant, to desist," was reasonable, and general principles were laid down as to the validity of bye-laws made by a local representative body. The cases noted below must be considered in the light of this decision. A bye-law made under this section provided that "every person who shall sound, or play upon any musical instrument, or sing or make any noise in any street, or near any house after having been required by any householder resident in such street or by any police constable to desist, either on account of any illness of any inmate of such house or for any reasonable cause." A captain in the Salvation Army was convicted under this bye-law for playing a concertina on a Sunday morning, surrounded by a large crowd, after a constable had required him to desist, telling him that he had reasonable cause for so doing, as several complaints had been made by the inhabitants. Held, that the bye-law was reasonable, and that it was for the justices to decide whether there was reasonable cause. R. v. Powell, 51 L. T. (N.S.) 92; 48 J. P. 740. A bye-law that no person, not being a member of Her Majesty's army or auxiliary forces, acting under the orders of his commanding officer, shall sound or play upon any musical instrument in any of the streets of the borough on Sunday, was held unreasonable and ultra vires. Johnson v. Croydon (Mayor of), 16 Q. B. D. 708; 55 L. J. M. C. 117; 54 L. T. (N.s.) 295; 50 J. P. 487; so also a bye-law that every person who in any street should sound or play upon any musical or noisy instrument, or should sing, recite, or preach in any street without having previously obtained a licence in writing from the mayor, and every person who having obtained such licence should fail to observe, or should act contrary to any of the conditions of such licence, should forfeit a sum not exceeding 20s. Munro v. Watson, 57 L. T. (N.s.) 366; 51 J. P. 660. A bye-law which forbade the keeping of swine within a borough was held bad. Everett v. Grapes, 3 L. T. (N.s.) 669 ; 25 J. P. 644. So also a bye-law that parents should be liable to a penalty if they suffered a child to sell articles in the street after a certain hour. Macdonald v. Lochrane, 51 J. P. 629. A bye-law that no person should erect any booth for the purpose of any show or public entertainment in any place within a borough without licence from the mayor, which licence should only be given during the annual fair time, if any three inhabitants objected, was held void. Elwood v. Bullock, 6 Q. B. 383; 13 L. J. Q. B. 330; 8 Jur. 1044. NOTE. The following borough bye-law was held valid : "If any butcher or dealer Sect 23. in meat, or any fishmonger, poulterer, or other person, shall expose or offer for sale on his premises, or have in his possession with intent to sell or to expose for sale, any meat, fish, poultry, or other victuals or provisions unfit for the food of man, he shall be subject to a penalty, to be recovered before two justices, who shall decide on the unfitness." Shillito v. Thompson, 1 Q. B. D. 12; 45 L. J. Q. B. 18; 33 L. T. (N.s.) 506; 24 W. R. 57. One of the Salvation Army used a concertina in a street of a borough, a bye-law of which, made under 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 74, prohibited the use of any noisy instrument to the annoyance of any of the inhabitants. The justices found it was a noisy instrument, and some inhabitants proved being annoyed. Held, there was evidence to support a conviction; that it was not necessary to prove that the instrument was a public nuisance to all the inhabitants, and that the bye-law was not ultra vires. Booth v. Howell, 53 J. P. 678; 5 T. L. R. 449. In a prosecution under a bye-law of a town providing that any person making a violent noise in the streets to the annoyance of the inhabitants shall be guilty of an offence, it is sufficient to prove that one inhabitant has been annoyed. Innes v. Newman, [1894] 2 Q. B. 292; 63 L. J. M. C. 198; 70 L. T. (N.s.) 689; 42 W. R. 573 ; 58 J. P. 543. A Local Improvement Act authorized conservators of a common to make bye-laws and regulations for the prevention of, and protection from, nuisances, and for keeping order. The appellant was charged for placing on the common a boat-van for pleasure without licence and without payment of the prescribed fee, contrary to a bye-law made. Held, that the bye-law was not ultra vires merely because it prohibited vans without leave, and because it did not confine this to such as were nuisances. Nash v. Manning, 58 J. P. 718. A bye-law made by a county council under s. 16 of the Local Government Act, 1888, was in the following terms: "No person shall in any street or public place, or on land adjacent thereto, sing or recite any profane or obscene song or ballad, or use any profane or obscene language." Held, that the byelaw was invalid, since even if the words "or on land adjacent thereto," which were clearly too wide, were struck out, it was still unreasonable, because it did not contain any words importing that the acts must be done so as to cause annoyance. Strickland v. Hayes, [1896] 1 Q. B. 290; 65 L. J. M. C. 55; 74 L. T. (N.S.) 137; 44 W. R. 398; 60 J. P. 164. In a later case, however, a defendant was charged with using indecent and obscene language in a dwellinghouse, in a room abutting on and then open to the public street, to the annoyance of persons in the street, contrary to a bye-law of the county council. It was held that the bye-law was valid. Mantle v. Jordan, [1897] 1 Q. B. 248; 66 L. J. Q. B. 224; 75 L. T. (N.s.) 552; 61 J. P. 119; 13 T. L. R. 121. A bye-law made under this section prohibited, under a penalty, any person from frequenting and using any street or other public place within the borough, for the purpose of bookmaking or betting. Held, that the bye-law was one which could properly be made for the good rule and government of the borough, and was therefore valid. Burnett v. Berry, [1896] 1 Q. B. 641; 65 L. J. M. C. 118; 74 L. T. (N.s.) 494; 44 W. R. 512; 60 J. P. 375; 12 T. L. R. 362. As to the evidence in a charge under such a bye-law, see Whickham v. Ashe, Times, January 16th, 1897. A bye-law of a county council provided as follows: "A person shall not, together with any other person or persons, assemble in any street or public place for the purpose of betting." This bye-law was held valid. Godwin v. Walker, 60 J. P. 308; 12 T. L. R. 367. Sect. 23. valid. A bye-law made by the county council of Warwickshire, under s. 16 of the Local Government Act, 1888, was as follows: "Lights on vehicles. A person driving or having charge of any vehicle shall from the end of the first hour after sunset to two o'clock a.m., except during such part (if any) of that period as shall be between the rising and the setting of the moon, carry attached to such vehicle a lighted lamp or lighted lamps, which shall be so constructed or placed as to exhibit a light in the direction in which he is proceeding, and so as to prove adequate means of signalling the approach or position of the vehicle Provided also that where such vehicle is carrying timber, such person shall also carry attached at the end thereof a lamp or lamps so constructed as to exhibit a light or lights visible to persons overtaking such vehicle." The respondent, a carter, was summoned for driving a waggon laden with timber during the prohibited hours without proper lights, contrary to the bye-law. The charge was dismissed, on the ground that the bye-law was invalid as being unreasonable. Held, that the bye-law was Walker v. Stretton, 44 W. R. 425; 60 J. P. 313; 12 T. L. R. 363. A bye-law made by a county council provided that "no person shall drive, or cause to be driven, any timber carriage over any main road or other highway in the county between sunset and sunrise, unless it has lamps showing a bright and adequate light both to the front and rear of the carriage. Held, that the bye-law was reasonable, and therefore valid. Williams v. Groves, 12 T. L. R. 450. By a bye-law made by the council of a municipal borough, purporting to act under s. 23 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882, it was provided that "no person shall, to the annoyance or disturbance of residents or passengers, keep or manage a shooting gallery, swing-boat, roundabout, or other like thing, in any street or public place, or on land adjoining or near to such street or public place, provided always that this bye-law shall not apply to any fair lawfully held." The respondent erected and kept two sets of swing-boats and roundabouts, worked by steam power, with organs attached, on private land near a public street, and not on the day of any lawful fair, to the annoyance of certain residents who lived near by, and were disturbed by the noise of the organs and the crowds attracted, as well by the respondent's erections as by other shows held at the same place and time. The borough justices dismissed an information against the respondents for a breach of the above bye-law, on the ground that it was ultra vires, and bad for extending to land adjoining or near to a street or public place. Held, that the bye-law was valid, and case remitted to the justices for conviction. Teale v. Harris, 61 J. P. 744. A bye-law of the borough of C. provided: "No person shall in the following streets (certain streets were named), post, paste, or affix any bill, notice, or placard on any building, wall, fence, gate, door, pillar, tree or post in or abutting on any street, between nine a.m. and six p.m., provided that notices of the effect of the foregoing bye-law shall be affixed and kept affixed in each of the above-mentioned streets. Held, that the bye-law was repugnant to the general law, and, therefore, ultra vires and bad. R. v. Richards, 61 J. P. 40. A bye-law may be good in part. R. v. Faversham, 8 T. R. 352; R. v. Lundie, 31 L. J. M. C. 157; 8 Jur. (N.s.) 640 ; 5 L. T. (n.s.) 830 ; 10 W. R. 267, A bye-law in restraint of trade is bad. Hesketh v. Braddock, 3 Burr. 1847; Bodwick v. Fennell, 1 Wils. 233; Clark v. Le Cren, 9 B. & C. 52; Shaw v. Poynter, 2 A. & E. 312. But a mere regulation not in restraint of trade, as that no person should slaughter animals within a city, is valid. Pierce v. Bartrum, Cowp. 269. And a bye-law prohibiting the sale of articles in a public recreation ground, except in places to be specified, was held valid in Gray v. Sylvester, 46 W. R. 63; 14 T. L. R. 12. |