362 TlMEHRI. 
Resolution nor Bye-law shall on any account or pretence 
whatever, at any time infringe or controvert." Mr. 
Watt had stated at the previous meeting, when asking 
that this report be considered, that it was analogous to 
the paper of Mr. Ken rick read before the Society last 
year. In this he (Mr. Mackay) did not agree. In the 
report in question there were two sides, that of the 
majority and that of the minority. If in discussing it 
they adopted either they would be bringing in politics. 
In 1886 Mr. Julius Conrad had been ruled ont of order 
by the then Chairman when bringing forward notices 
of motion in connection with the married women's 
property laws and he (Mr. Mackay) thought the 
discussion of this report also out of order. He would 
be bound to abide by the Chairman's ruling, but if 
this went against him he would enter his protest against 
any discussion on the report. Further, in the event of 
the Chairman's ruling being adverse to him, he would 
ask that the discussion be postponed until the opinion of 
their legal adviser as to whether or not the question was 
political, be obtained. 
Mr. Watt said that as his name had been mentioned 
he would give his reasons for asking that this report 
be obtained. The question of opening up the country 
had been discussed by the Society, and a resolution 
forwarded to the Government, the outcome of which 
appeared to be the Commission and its Report. Mr. 
Mackay himself had taken part in that discussion and 
said that " if the Government would only guarantee the 
interest there would be no difficulty in raising money for 
a good scheme." Even Dr. Carrington, Chairman of the 
Commission, had spoken of this matter before the 
