Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

BRISK EXCHANGE

Our Own Corresp ndent.)

• ' • • L 1 COUNCIL MEETING QUESTION OF COW gOLLARS CAUSES DiFFEREFCE OF OPINION. NEW ARRANGEMENT MADE.

(From

Opotiki, Vednesday. There was a f eeling of expe tancy and tenseness under the first oi erly proceedings of the Opotiki Borough Council on Tuesday night a:d quite a number of the general p blic was present. The first hint of janything unsual, however, was when Ir. Shalfoon's notice of motion proosing to rescind a former motion fdng the price of cow-collars was red. This gave rise to a lengthy discssion at the end of which Cr. Short lose to a point of order and claimed pat Cr. Shalfoon's motion was quit| but of ofder as the notice of motioji ijn the agenda pap-er- merely suggesied that the old motion be rescinded, land said nothing about fixing a new price for collars. Cr. Shalfoon, however, coimtired with the statement that the botici of motion as put in by him iore the words "and that the mattei\ he reeonsidered," and this was pr^ved to be correct. 1 | Cr. Shalfoon moved that thehmpon carried in May in conneetioa Vith cow-collar. charges be rescinde\hl Cr. Short asked for an explanajon. In his explanation Cr. Shalfoon \ud that an amendment to the origjal motion "was lost owing to Cr. J-,J. Moody being absent." Cr. Short submitted .that Cr. Shlfoon had no right to say this.

Not Full Council. ; Cr. Shalfoon then amended H statement to the effect that when th amendment was lost a full coune. was not present and this was his rea son for asking for the motion to bi rescinded, as in his opinion the chafi ges were too high. Cr. Moody said that he agreed with Cr. Shalfoon that the charges were too high. Cr. Short considered that the matter required careful consideration, as some people did not want cows on the road and he thought the council sh'ould consider those who did not want the cows there

as well as those who did. He was of the opinion that if the matter was gone intol it would be found the practice was dllegal. Cr. Maine agreed with Cr. Short and suggested that the council should consider the revenue aspect. Prineiple Approved. Cr. Shalfoon pointed out that the old council had agreed to the prineiple of allowing the cows on the road ■and it was now merely a question of the charge. The reduction of the value of butter and milk meant that the people could not alford so much for the cow-collars. In reply to Or. Anderson, Cr. Shalfoon said that he was of the opinion that a reduced charge per h'ead would mean increased revenue. If there were less cows there would be more grass and in his opinion that would tempt other people to allow their horses on the roads at night. Council's Liability. Cr. Short suggested th'at in the case of an accident resulting from cows grazing on the streets, the council might be liable for damages, but the clerk pointed out that the council did not grant a license for cows to graze on the road, but undertook not to impound cows which were wearing- a collar. This obviated this danger. Cr. Patterson suggested that the cows grazing on the road were cheaper than using a mowing machine. Cr. Short submitted that Cr. Shalfoon's notice of motion was out of order, as he should have stated in his notice of motion that if the motion was rescinded he would move an amendment in the price, as if the motion were rescinded it would not he possible to fix the new price without another notice of motion. Cr. Shalfoon then pointed out that the notice of motion as put in hy him was not quite the same as on the agenda paper. His original notice of motion bore the words "and that the matter be reconsidered. Thr clerk apologised for the omission. Motion Rescinded. Th'e rescinding of the motion was then carried and Cr. Shalfoon moved that the price for cow-collars be £2 for the first cow and £3 for the second and a refund he made tq those who had already registered under the previous arrangement. The new motion was carried on the motion of Cr. Anderson. It was decided to limit the issuing of collars to 60 cows.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RMPOST19330526.2.7

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 541, 26 May 1933, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
726

BRISK EXCHANGE Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 541, 26 May 1933, Page 2

BRISK EXCHANGE Rotorua Morning Post, Volume 2, Issue 541, 26 May 1933, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert