CARNIVAL FUNDS

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 326, 13 September 1932, Page 3

CARNIVAL FUNDS

PARTICIPATORS CLAIM AGAINST. MAYOR TO RECOVER PROPERTY. POLICE SYMPATHETIC. Arising out of the carnival which was held at the Basin Reserve, Wellington, on New Year's Eve last, an action was brought against the Mayor, Mr. T. C. A. Hislop, and the City Corporation, by Henry Seton Chapman and William Arthur Hastings, stewards, of Wellington, who are at present serving terms of imprisonnient. Plaintiffs alleged that the proceeds from the carnival had not been divided between them and the Mayor's fund according to an agreement previously reached, and they asked for £50 damages as well as what nxight he due to them. A legal point arose, how- j ever, and their counsel eleeted to be ' nonsuited. In their statement of claim plaintiffs set out that they were proprietors of the Wellington Social Club and that Mr. Hislop was sole trusbee of the t Mayors' fund for the relief of unem- j ployed. It was agreed between the j parties in Nevember last, plaintiffs said, that the carnival would he con- . ducted in the name of the Wellington 'Social Club, and that half the net pro- | fits would go to the Mayor's fund, with the other half going to the plain- ; tiffs. Defenaants had received all the admission moneys and proceeds from ! the sale of tickets, and had paid half the gross takings to Mr. Hislop and : only £80 to the plaintiffs. For this | reason, they said, they had not been able to meet the debts due by them in respect of the carnival, and had suffered the loss of their reputation and credit. Plaintiffs askea (a) for an account of the moneys paid for admission and proceeds from the sale of ^ tickets; (b) for judgment for what 1 might be found to be due to them; (c) ; for £50 damages for breach of agree- ; ment; and (d) for the costs of the action. j Issue Complicated. Counsel for plaintiffs, in his opening address to the court, said that the case was an unusual one, and was an action brought by two men who were i at present serving sentences of imprisonment imposed upon them by the Supreme Court. It was an action against two defendants, firstly, the Corporation of the City of Wellington, and, secondly, Mr. T. C. A, Hislop, the Mayor, sued in his private capacity. The cause of action, said counsel, , arose out of a carnival conducted at the Basin Reserve on New Year's Eve last by the Wellington Social Club, which was a proprietary organi- | sation, unincorporated, begun, conducted, and owned by the two plaintiffs. The aetual management of the club, the profits — if any — or loss — if any — were the concern of the two plaintiffs alone. i Toward the end of the year plaintiffs formed the scheme of assisting their own affairs and at the sarne time the Mayor's fund by running a carnival at the Basin Reserve on New Year's Eve. They approached Mr. Hislop toward the end of November, told him of the scheme, asked for the use of the Basin Reserve and proposed that the net profits should be divided in equal shares between the Mayor's fund and tbemselves. Around the word "net" the whole of the present action had arisen. A Waste of Time. j Counsel was proceeding to discuss what had afterwards ensued, and the position of the plaintiffs, when the magistrate, Mr. T. B. McNeil, S.M., told him that he had been looking over the claim, and that it seemed to tuni on the taking of an account. The last three clauses of the plaintiffs' prayer depended, it seemed, on the first. But there was no provision in the Magistrate's Court for the taking of such an account. Nowhere in the Magistrate's Court, he said, was there any provision, and if what counsel wanted was the taking of an account between plaintiffs and defendants, : then he did not think it was of any use hearing the action. "I feel it's a waste o'f time," the magistrate said. Amended Claim. Counsel for the plaintiffs at this stage asked that he be enabled to file an amended statment of claim, elaiming the actual amount alleged to he due. He made the application on the ground that on the basis of a letter he had received from the city solicitor the council thought they owed someone £13 13s lld. No move had been made to pay the money until the present action was commenced. If it were shown, as it would be, that plaintiffs and no others were the Wellington Social Club, then the City Council could be taken to have held that sum ever since the carnival and to have made no effort to pay it. After further legal argument a nonsuit was agreed to by the parties.