CLEARING THE AIR

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19734, 26 September 1929, Page 5

CLEARING THE AIR

SPECIAL MEETING HELD.

ACCLIMATISATION SOCIETY'S TROUBLES. Reference* to "snakes in the grass," and several notices of motion have been sufficient to disclose that the affairs of the North Canterbury Acclimatisation Society have not been conducted with absolute harmony during the past few weeks and matters eame to a head last night at a special general meeting of members of the Society, held in the Jellicoe Hall. There was an attendance of about 300 or nrnre, presided over by Mr G. T. Robertson. Mr Robertson explained that the position arose through one of the scrutineers reporting that there had been a number of duplicate voting papers at the election. Correspondence had passed between himself and ths then chairman, and the matter was dealt with by the Council. They were there to deal with the question. In moving his motion to aaiend Rule 16 by the inclusion of the words, "No committee shall exceed five members," Mr C. J. Hulsey said that in 1920 the Gardens Committee consisted of five members, but for 1929-30 tho> had vine, and that was a olear Working major'iy over the remainder of the Council. "Can you imagine any committee having a working majority over the remainder of the Councilt" he addid. "It is not fair to the members jf the committee themselves to say that they have only to put a proposition up to the Council and have it carried." "Perhaps I am one of the snakes in the grass—you will find that out later," said Mr R. S. McKenzie, in asking what was the necessity for having rine on the Gardens Committee. He ask<d what they had got to do. They had only one man to look after. Three could do the work.

Mr D. Mulholland said the Acclimatisation Society would have had a farm of its own if it had not been for the divergence of opinion as to the site, on the part of the Gardens Committee. "It isn't the Gardens Committee that decides that point," said the chairman. A show of hands disclosed that there were 119 for the motion, and 141 against the motion, which was accordingly lost. Tbe Ballot Papers. The meeting then considered the motion by Mr C. J. Sloman dealing with the election system and the ballot papers. Mr Sloman said that the object of the motion was to make certain restrictions. The secretary should be restricted to the same work as was the secretary of the C.J.C. What was good enough for the C.J.C. was good enough for the Society. As far as he could see the secretary had in no way exceeded his power in issuing the papers he had. In fact, he eould not have done anything else. He felt sure it was the duty of the secretary to issue a third ballot paper if the others were lost.

Mr McKenzie seconded the motion, saying that Mr Sloman had no personal interest in the matter. There was a loose link somewhere as far as the 41 ballot papers were concerned. There was a good deal of noise for a while and the chairman appealed to the meeting. Another member said that as far as he could understand the system of balloting was secret. It seemed to him this was a personal matter, and that several members were disgruntled. Asked by a member to explain the system of the ballot, and why 41 ballot papers were sent out when they should not have been, Mr Lawrenee said there was no question as far as a secret ballot was concerned, that the present system was as watertight as they could get it. Every system was open to abuse if anyone looked for it. He was dealing with the motion before the meeting, and he believed this was a veiled attempt to get at the secretary and no one else. (Hear, hear.) Me McKenzie protested that he had been misrepresented. Mr D. F. Hobbs said that if this rule went through they would cease to have a secret ballot. No reason had been given for a change-over from the secretary to the auditor. He opposed a change because no argument had been brought forward to support a change. Mr C. W. Hervey (the secretary) was cheered when he rose to apeak. After he had made his explanation his remarks were endorsed by Mr W. T. Billens and Mr W. J. Boone, the two scrutineers. Both scrutineers denied having disclosed any information about the ballot. Mr Boone said that as far au the ballot was eoneerned everything was fair and above board. "Don't you think it would have been a very good idea to have invited the school chiidren here to see how sports eon duct a meeting?" asked; a member. There was no answer to this. Another Suggestion. Mr Edgar Stead said that as far as he could see the rule was capable of one improvement. They were supplied with papers and envelopes, and there was a double chance of losing one of thorn. He suggested that the voting paper could be constructed with a perforated end with the member's number stamped on it. There would be a gummed strip inside and the paper could be folded up with the number projecting from the top. That could be sent in any envelope, and the number lould be torn off after it was checked and the paper then opened. He moved that as an amendment to Mr Sloman's motion.

Mr P. J. Molloy seconded the amendment. He was convinced, tie said, that this was a move to get Mr \ Hervey out of his job. Mr Whiteside urged members to "vote solidly for the amendment and do away With this pin-pricking." (Applause.) Mr M H. Godby said that he had had a good deal of experience with the Society and had found that there had always been a section prepared to believe the worse of the Council. He could honestly sav to the best of his knowledge and belief the Council had striven to satisfy everybody, and had dealt fairly and honestly with every matter that had come before it. Mr Stead's amendment was put to i the meeting, and the voting resulted as follows:—For, 260; against, 8. The amendment was carried, and aa the substantive motion, was adopted. Special Meetings. Mr C. R. Clark then submitted his motion regarding the calling of special meetings, providing that the president should call a special meeting on receipt of a requisition signed by no les3 than five per cent, of registered members; and for a requisition signed br 12 members to be considered first bv the Council before a meeting is called. . , Mr Clark said that it was absurd that 12 men should be allowed to call together 1400 men, of whom perhaps 1.560 did not wish to discuss the mnttei at all. and put the Society to the expense of about £35, just to have a a ort of quarterly dog fight. The motion was seconded by Mr W. L. Rennie. Mr McKenzie said he could not understand Mr Clark being the father of this motion. It was a retrograde step and if they thought they were going to stop the discontent that was outside they were making a big mistake. Mr McKenzie continued for &

while, but was counted out by a section of the meeting. The motion was carried, only two voices being heard against it.