“MUCH ADO.”

Taranaki Daily News, 23 November 1921, Page 6

“MUCH ADO.”

BREAKING THE SABBATH? STRATFORD COUNCIL AND CHARITY CONCERT. (From Our Own Correspondent.) Stratford, Nov. 22. On the evening of Sunday, November 13, a sacred concert was held in the Stratford Picture Theatre for .the purpose of assisting Mr. W. Mather, who lost his sight in a recent accident at the Mt. Egmont quarries. Artists from other towns gave their services, and about £2B was raised. The Stratford Borough Council dropped a bombshell last week when the Mayor announced at the meeting of the progress committee that the sacred concert was a breach of the by-law, in that the promoters had not applied for permission to hold the concert, and a resolution was passed that the manager of the picture theatre should be. prosecuted for not obtaining permission- The matter has roused much interest in the town, and was the subject of a lively ctiscussion at last night’s meeting of the council. Councillor Lawson moved an amendment to the progress committee’s resolution: “That the council regrets that the promoters of the recent sacred concert did not apply for a permit to hold the concert, and owing to the worthy object for which the concert was held the council will not take proceedings, but in ariu other cases the by-law will be enforce.” They all knew that tfce man who was stricken with total blindness whilst in the employ of the Government and had a wife and nine children dependent on him

The Mayor: “Don’t take on that argument. We are not taking action against this man at all.” Cr. Lawson said that he was just leading up to that. The promoters of the concert against whom proceedings were to be taken did their work from the motive of helping a brother man, and the man who promoted the concert had told him that he thought that though he would have to get a permit for a picture show or other entertainment, he would not have to get a permit for a sacred concert. It was the general feeling of the town that no action should be taken. No action was taken on the occasion -for the Roberts fund.

Cr. Ward seconded the motion. He was informed that when the concert was held for the Roberts fund no permit was asked for, and it was not thought necessary to get a permit. The Mayor said that was a lot of nonsense. A permit had been asked for. The chairman of the pictures had asked him personallyCr. Ward said that he must have been misinformed. He understood that no permit was asked for. The Mayor said that he hoped the council would turn down the amendment. They had heard that Mr. Ward (the picture manager) did not know that a permit had to be applied for.-It was known in the case of Mr. Roberts’ benefit. Permits were refused on Christmas Day and Good Friday simply because those days were like Sundays, and he guaranteed tfiat no picture manager in New Zealand would plead ignorance’ of the by-law. It was all very well to plead that it was -for a good object; so it was, but the Town Hall was open for these objects not only on Sunday nights, bur on any night in the week. If Mr. Ward had done the right thing and written to the council, and not as he did to the papers, and admitted that he was wrong and apologised for being wrong, he would have been the first to support the amendment. But when Mr. Ward wrote as he did to the paper, which was an insult to the council and himself, he said they should prosecute. Cr- Jackson supported the amendment. By-laws were being broken every day in the week. The by-law in question ‘was broken through an oversight. It had not injured the council in any way and hail helped a ran along. The people of the town were unanimous in thinking the council should not prosecute. It was quite a small matter, and below the dignity of ’the council to sue for such a small thing. Cr. Hunter opposed the amendment. Cr. Cameron also opposed the amendment. To carry it would be a vote of no-confidence in the Mayor. The amendment was then put and lost on a division being called, Crs. Lawson, Ward and Jackson voting for it.