THE THEATRE ROYAL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 15, 11 October 1910, Page 8

THE THEATRE ROYAL.

CITY FATHERS DISCUSS IT. AND MAKE NO HEADWAY. The Borough Council at its meeting last night, discussed the Theatre Royal and its fire .exists. The mater was brought up by the following letter fcom Mr. E. 'Uilmour, secretary to the Theatre Royal Company:—"l am instructed by my directors to again apply for the license for the theatre and to point out that the repairs authorised to be done to the fire escapes have been completed to the inspector's satisfaction, vide his report of 10th August, 11)10." THE SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT. The report referred to was as follows: "The repairs authorised to be done to the fire escapes have been completed this morning to my satisfaction, and under I ordinary conditions with the assistance of the firemen on duty should meet with any .case of emergency should it arrive at any time (which I trust will never occur). In self-protection I have again ! to advise you that although the present fire escapes are the only means of dealing with the question under existing conditions I absolutely decline to be" held responsible for anything that may occur should an outbreak of fire occur,* for, as a matter of fact, in my opinion the building is not suitable for a theatre with its present environments." Cr. Watkins moved, and Cr. Gilbert seconded, that the application for a iicense bi. granted. Cr. Dockrill said in view of the second portion of the Inspector's report he could not support the motion. Cr. GMbert wanted to know why the Fire Board- couldn't "come out manfully and straightforwardly," and say what tliev wanted. Cr. Wilson considered the company's letter was merely an attempt to evade the resolution arrived at fay the Council ] at its Inst meeing, in which the company was directed .to communicate with the Fire Board. What was the use of councillors posing as antagonists of a supposedly oppressive Fire Board? The Council was powerless to issue a license legally until the fire inspector gave a ■ certificate. If a license were issued against his advice or recommendation, 1 and an accident happened by which loss of life was occasioned,* there could be ' no doubt that the councillors votinw in ' favor of a license in such circumstances would be indicted for manslaughter. He ■ quite agreed with Cr. ! Gilbert that a > great deal too much of the time of the ' Council was being taken up by this mat- ■ ter, but it could have been obviated by the Theatre Company approaching the Fire Board, as the Council had suggested 5 to them. But this they resolutely refus- ' ed to do. [ Cr. Gilbert protested that neither the " Superintendent nor the Board had as " yet informed the company as to their ," requirements. A conversational discussion took place " as to what was the real authority in 7 these matters, and the town clerk sought to throw some light on it by reading clauses from the Municipal Corporations " Act and the Fire Brigades Act. Then the discussion commenced de novo, Cr. Watkins pointing out that the Superintendent had not objected to the t issue of a license, but had said he would r not take any responsibility, which was » vastly different. " The motion was put Sife! lost 611 'the . following division:—Ayes: C*rs". Watkins, . West, Clarke and Gilbert; noes: The ) Mayor and Crs. Dockrill, Bellringer, WIIi son, Hobbs and Browne. Cr. Gilbert asked: What is the position , of the Theatre Royal now? The Mayor: It is on unlicensed build- . ing, and liable to fines if used for public [ entertainments. Cr. Gilbert: That means closing, the theatre. Cr. Wilson: Not necessarily so. 1 Cr. Gilbert: Yes, it does. Who's going to take the responsibility for closing the theatre? Cr. Wilson: It may not be closed.) They may spend the necessary £2O, and get over the difficulty. He moved that a copy of the company's letter be sent to the Fire Board, and that the company be requested to communicate with the Fire Board direct. If the company would only go to the Fire Board, the whole thing would be settled in five minutes. Cr. Gilbert: Why not go to the Superintendent? Cr. Wilson: Cr. Gilbert should know that the Superintendent is the servant of the Fire Board, and it is usual to go to the master, not to the servant. Cr. Browne seconded. Cr. Clarke moved an amendment that the Fire Board be written to and asked to forward an unambiguous report from their inspector. It was of no use to bother about a report from the Board, for it was the inspector's report that counted, he said. The amendment found a seconder in Cr. Gilbert, who said that the statement that the Superintendent was the servant of the Board was news to him. At last meeting he had gathered that the Fire Board and the Borough Council were servants of the Superintendent. Cr. Wilson: Oh, we can't help your imagination. Cr. Gilbert: It seems that the Superintendent doesn't suit. Cr. Clarke: Well, let them sack him. Cr. Gilbert said he had had it from one of the Fire Board members that the Superintendent told them what to do, and they just did it. Cr. Wilson suggested that if the Board were dissatisfied with their inspector they could appoint another councillor. Cr. Gilbert: Why a councillor? Cr. Wilson: I thought you were after lit! Cr. Gilbert's reply was inaudible at the Press table. Replying, Cr. Clarke said that Cr. Bellringer, the Superintendent, was an expert in these matters, and his report was worth something. The Fire Board members knew no more about it than he did. The amendment was lost on the same division. A further amendment by Cr. Watkins, "That the attention of the police auth- ! onties be called to the fact that the theatre is an unlicensed building, and [ that it is being let for public entertainI ments," failed to find a seconder. The motion was then put and carried.