A SLAUGHTERHOUSE LICENSE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 857, 1 July 1910, Page 2

A SLAUGHTERHOUSE LICENSE.

CASE OF BANKS MEAT COMPANY. PROTEST OF BUTCnERS. A deputation of master butchers waited on the City Council last evening and asked tho council to reconsider its decision of the previous meeting to reissue a meat export slaiighterhauso license to the Banks Meat Company.

. Mr. Hampton staled that it was against the law and against the council's byJaws to grant the permit, and a great injustice would be done to local butchers. The company was not an export company, but a slaughtering company, in opposition to the abattoirs. 11' they took business from tho abattoirs tho council's contractors l'or killing at the abattoirs would be forced to throw up their contracts, and charges would be ultimately increased. Tho fact that this company had been unfortunate in its financial operations was not reason why they should be allowed to recoup themselves by a means that was denied to privato persons.

Mr. Liddle, contractor at the abattoirs, said that in making up their tender, his firm calculated on' the quantities of stock set c.ut in the schedule given them by the council. They were already getting less than the schedule numbers, and if any more stock were taken l'rom the abattoirs they would have to throw up their contract.

Mr. Woiland detailed various reasons why it v.as more advantageous to slaughter at the Banks Company's premises than at tho abattoirs. The conditions were not fair to the small butcher who wished to deal fairly and squarely witli the abattoirs. The abattoirs were a splendid institution, and the work done there was second to none in New Zealand. If the present contractors had to withdraw, they did not know what sort of contractors would take their place. The Mayor: If the Banks Company have all these advantages, why don't you go to them yourself, and not to the abattoirs?— Mr. Woiland: I am going there. (Laughter.) The Mayor: Does any butcher in Wellington exercise a dominion over the other butchers, and require them to go to tho abattoirs?— No.

Mr. "Wolland further stated that the manager of the Banks Company had askct; him to slaughter with them, and he h id replied that the Banks Company would be "blown out" in a few weeks, and that was no good to him. To which the manager replied: "I don't think so. Wo'll go through all right." Mr. WolJand then stated that if this happened, lie would take his slaughtering to the company. Councillor Atkinson afterwards moved that the council's resolution of last meeting, giving the company twelve months in which to erect ireezing works, bo rescinded, and that the recommendation of the Abattoirs Committee that tho council strougiy protest against tlio reissuo of tho license bo adopted, on tho ground that the grant of such a license would be a plain violation of the law. Councillor Atirinson contended that, apart from the legal aspect, it would be an injustice to tlio butchers, and an injustice to tho ratepayers as a whole to grant the license.

Councillor Fletcher supported the motion, and urged that when the company had facilities for exporting meat, and wero ready to commence that business, that would be the proper time for them to apply for tho permit. Tho Mayor said he agreed neither that tho law was broken in granting the jiermit, nor that it was against equity. Ho argued from tho statute to show that there would bo no contravention of the law if tho permit was given. "What the company were asking for was a recommendation to the tiovernment to grant a license. The council had no power to grant a. license itself. The equity was undoubtedly in favour of tho company. Forty-eight butchers had previously signed a requisition to tho. council to delegate slaughtering powers to the Banks Company, and .£15,000 had been spent by the company. Now six butchers formed a deputation to urge that no' license should be granted, and two members of that deputation—Messrs. Hampden and Wolland, were amongst the signatories" of the previous requisition. "Too much rhetoric." was a fault found by Councillor Hindmarsh with the Mayor's remarks. He mo~ed as an amendment that Mr. C. P. Skerrett bo referred to for a legal opinion on the matter. It would be ridiculous to take tho Mayor's rhetoric as a legal opinion on the subject. Councillor Fitzgerald seconded the amendment.

Councillor M'Laren said that the council had previously decided that it should not delegate its powers under tlie Slaughtering Act. That had prevented other parties from taking up this business, and it would be outrageous now to delegate its powers to a particular company. Councillor Luke urged that the council had never contemplated doing all the slaughtering for the city, and an injustice would b$ dono if the license was refused.

Councillor Morrah expressed his opinion that the company had no intention to export meat. Councillor Devine urged that the Government, and not the council, would take the responsibility of breaking tho law if the license was granted. The agitation against the company was stirred up by tho killing contractors at the abattoirs for their own gain. He would oppose tho amendment.

Councillor Bnllinger supported the amendment, which was carried.