FATHER AND SON.

Press, Volume LXI, Issue 18547, 24 November 1925, Page 9

FATHER AND SON.

ABATTOIR CONTRACTS. DISCUSSED BY COUNCIL. There was some discussion at last •-fit's meeting of tho "City Council !L the report of the Abattoirs and Committee w a3 being contidtred. ' The committee reported having re'ed fo° r t cndcrs for thc a °attoir • lightering contract, and after having IfrrreA with the Master Butchers' Aviation recommended thc acceptance »the highest and tho lowest tenders, v that of Messrs Wootton and Son?, A Messrs Wootton and Dixon. The tract vas for three years, and will "'"up into force on the Ist proximo. (V T Cooke moved that the. clause bo fired back io the (Jomniittee for i'uriw consideration. C> J). G - Sullivan supported thc i'e» and said the contract had been itouo , c twn ] owcg (; tenderers, Irt dlber lowest tenderer, who had done iirork f« r 1 -' lO Council previously, ! j'hwn passed over. Everyone had K *tkied -.vith him. The commit!Tigd to five thf Council satisfacJ" batons whv this tenderer had been j3U : 'ov«r. ,-.;■ Nothing to Hide. r VT. E- Lead ley said the oommit- «• hidMthing Io hide in this matter. the precedent of previgiven the contract to the JEIStW lowest tenderers. The .Wkfth«t tendered had not been at < Twul*i* ctoT ?> hut thc commiUe<! frf'«s» estimation, given the contract tolfci ttan who had given thc most fh«W or * aid t,!Cre W;IS * luito u lot nt iT»iatisfac tion among the butchers ?*.iU -committee's recommendation. SLrcontended that it would elimin,t» eoinpetition. They said the whole It fte• butchering contract would be. shesaift the hands of one family, and It thtf werc *JJssatisHcd with thc iithW- they would have to go to the W and Vice vcrsn. It seemed to him mm committee would have to put M : W stroD S fase t0 ex P lnln wl '- v §i# had not accepted one of the lowest vtfc 1 Leudley: Wc only followed preiooftd**«"* V^ cedca }: , ~ i * i '"Cf C. P. Agar said be would defy i««Be'to discover which was tho high-. «t Md which the lowest tender. "Cr W- J- S'«i agreed with the ShTOr. He asked how old thc preco- ' %t E H. Andrews said thc best thins to'bo done was to take tho whole thinr in Committee. Ho could expiain TeOOd deal about thc matter. The ftSttt butchers liked to bo consulted abWt these matters, but ibey failed to 'ttfce'among themselves, ai d the Council did not know where it stood. There HW* little dispute about the acceptance • M'-thfr highest tenderer, beci>"«> the .Micners wanted Mm for hi* work. The itiestton was. who was to come next. iM-WttA that the whole patter be Committee. ■ | -It \pas agreed to take subsequent discussion in Committee. | '' v -• I 1 Sack to Committee. .$ On resuming' open Council, Cr. 0. V. Agdf moved that the decision reached InCommtttce, namely the acceptance or! She lowest tender (that of Wootton and litem) be approved. I; Cr. :McKellar moved as an amendileat: "That having had two tenders '•teth* past, tho tenders of Wootton tSiiSon, and Wootton' and Dixon bo 4pjpfed.'\ . , flTho amcndioent was defeated, and ?tho motion carried on,the casting vote ol the M»yor. Cr. "W. B. Anderson moved as a further amendment that the report bo referred back to the Committee. This was seconded by Cr. W. J. Sim.

The Mayor stated'that he had been rung up by a very important mister butcher that day, and told that this was an attempt to ''gulp the Council. He thought it was wrong and monstrous, and he was not going to allow the Council to be "gulled" in this Manner.

V On being put to the meeting, Cr. amendment was carried by > nine votes'to seven, and the matter was r referred back to the Committee for furother, consideration.