MOVING PICTURES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXV, Issue 1157, 11 October 1913, Page 3

MOVING PICTURES.

MR. HAMER’S CIRCULAR TO PARLIAMENT.

We have been forwarded the following circular tor publication, issued to Honourable Members of the Legislative Council and the House of Representatives by Mr W. Hamer: —

“ Gentlemen,— Having seen by the Manawatu Heraed of the 30th. ult, that the local Borough Council has caused a circular letter to be sent to you asking that a clause be inserted in the Municipal Corporations Amendment Act giving Borough Councils power to carry on the business of picture proprietors, I write to protest against such a clause being inserted. I am interested with my wife in carrying on the business of showing moving pictures in the Borough of Foxton, and consider it is wholly unfair that the Council should use the ratepayers’ money to compete with them in a recognised business enterprise. If the business conducted by us was being carried on by a Limited Company the position might be that a number of ratepayers would be interested, and the Council by utilising a Hall for which no rent is paid, might be able to compete with their ratepayers so as to ruin them in this particular business. “If such a power were given to Borough Councils it might lend itself to very serious abuse, as the various boroughs in New Zealand could combine to run pictures at a very cheap rate, and for ibis purpose could utilise public halls and public money, and in fact use the funds of a certain body of the ratepayers to crush them in their own particular line of business. In addition to this, continuous shows might be run so as to exclude the public from the use of buildings which were primarily meant to be used at a fixed rate and without any risk of loss to the funds of the Corporation. “In connection with running a business of showing moving pictures contracts must be entered into and risks incurred which should never be undertaken by trustees, and I regard the Council as simply trustees for the ratepayers. “If the Legislature allows Borough Councils to enter into this line of business it will simply mean that the thin edge of the wedge will be inserted to open the way for Councils to enter into and compete with their ratepayers in other lines of business. “The business of showing moving pictures in New Zealand has now been firmly established by private enterprise, and many ratepayers are directly and financially interested in such business. If the power is given to Municipal Councils to step in now and utilise public buildings (constructed with public money) and the funds of the ratepayers to compete with the people who have established these businesses, then it seems to me to be unreasonable, unjust, and likely to be fraught with disastrous consequences, perhaps to the general body of ratepayers, owing to the risks incurred, and certainly to those ratepayers who are directly interested, owing to the unfair competition and abuses to which this power might give rise.

“In connection with this matter of abuse of power, I wish to give one instance which occurred in connection with our business and that of the Borough Council. Some time ago I offered to give the local Band a sum of £2O per annum and also the use of our Hall free for one night in the year if the Band would play a selection of music opposite our Hall on Saturday night in each week. This proposition the bandsmen laid before the Council and the latter body then informed them that if they (the Band) accepted my offer the Council would take away the bandsmen’s instruments which are vested in the Council as trustee for the Baud. The Council further arranged to give the Band a subsidy of and it now plays when required in front of the Municipal Picture Show. Needless to say it does not play in front of our Hall. To my mind this sort of thing is simply an unjustifiable and unwarranted abuse of power by a corporate body arising out of an unjustifiable and unwarranted competition in business with a private individual.

“Referring particularly to the letter written by Mr Kent-Johnston at the instigation of the Borough Council, I wish to poiut out in the first place that in addition to the ruling of His Honour the Chief Justice ‘that the Council has no powers to engage in this business,’ the Auditor-General put a tag to the last audited balance-sheet of the Foxton Borough Council stating “that the running of Picture Shows and a Skating Rink by the Borough is without authority of law.’’ No doubt the fact that the Borough Councillors have voted themselves and their families free passes to the pictures shown by the Corporation may have something to do with the Council’s determination to carry on the business in spite of the ruling of the Chief Justice that the Council has no power to carry on such business.

“In regard to the figures quoted in the letter, I wish to point out(i). That the return for the year ending 31st March, 1913, shows gross takings 14s od ; (2). That the return for the half year from 31st March, 1913, to 30th September 1913 (during which period my wife and I have been running a Picture Show) shows a gross return of /682 18s od. “Comparing these two returns

it will be seen that there is a great falling off in the returns for this year as compared with last year, and it is further to be noted that in arriving at the net profit of ending 30th September, 1913, no allowance has been made for rent nor for an item of incurred by the Council in connection with having an advertisement for Municipal Pictures erected by Mr Ballinger. “Some little time ago I inspected the accounts relating to the Municipal Pictures, and made a copy of the receipts and expenditure from the 31st March, 1913, down to the 23rd August, 1913. au d the figures as extracted by me show that the expenditure for that period exceeds the receipts by £l lß 18s 2d. In making up these figures I have taken into account the sum of paid to Mr Ballinger. “I quite fail to understand how it can be asserted that the Municipal Pictures show a profit for the half-year ending 30th September, 1913, of ,£302 16s gd for the items of expenditure noted by me up to the 23rd August, 1913, amount to £741 os nd as against the receipts up to 30th September, 1913, £682 18s od. “Apparently the only justification which the Council has in asking you to give them power to carry on the business of Picture Proprietors is that so far (not allowing anything for rent or depreciation) they have been able to show a profit. Surely, Sir, even if this can be shown to be the case it will require many more cogent reasons than this to induce you to give Borough Councils the power to enter into an admittedly speculative line of business especially as the power, if granted, would directly affect many interests and have very far reaching effects. “Trusting that you will use your influence to prevent the powers asked for being extended to Municipal Corporations,—l have the honour to be, etc.” (Signed) W. Hamer. The Town Clerk, on being shown the above, informed our representative that no such resolution as stated by Mr Hamer was ever passed by the Council, as the matter of the Band playing in front of Mr Hamer’s was never brought before the Council. Further, as to Mr Hamer’s figures, the Town Clerk states that as Mr Hamer has never seen the Town Hall account in the ledger, where the picture and other accounts are allocated under their respective headings, that Mr Hamer cannot be in a position to supply any figures from an authoritative view.