CR SHACKLOCK’S POSITION

Evening Star, Issue 14513, 3 November 1910, Page 6

CR SHACKLOCK’S POSITION

the SUMMONS ISSUED, AND THE HEARING FIXED. Mr IL Y. Widdowson, S.M., sat in tha Magistrate’s Court this morning to hear an application in the matter of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1908, and of John Bradley Shaddock, a councillor of the City, The affidavit of James Connor, of Dunedin, company manager, and an elector of High Ward, set out that the said John. Bradley Shack lock was elected a councillor for South Dunedin Ward on the 28th of April, 1909. In the month of April, 1909, the firm of H. K. Shaddock, Limited, of which the said John Bradley Shaddock is a director, supplied to the City Council for the electric power and lighting department, of which dejiartment the sai4 John Bradley Shaddock is chairman of committee, goods—namely, two ranges with auxiliary wood burners—to the value of £ll 4s 3d ; and the said firm of H. E. Shaddock were paid for the said goods by the Council on the 17th of May, 1909. On or about the 11th of March, 1910, the said firm of IL K. Shaddock supplied to the Council for the electric power and lighting department goods—namely, one lathe chuck —of the value of £lO, and were paid for the same by the Council on the 11th of May, 1910. On or about the 29th of June, 1910. the said firm of H. E. Shaddock supplied to the Council for the electric power and lighting department a two-foot Shaddock range, of the value of £4 10s. By reason, of the said John Bradley Shacklock being concerned in the supply of the goods mentioned, ho was incapable of being elected to be a councillor, and became incapable after his election of bolding such office as councillor. The said John Bradley Sliacldock lias nevertheless continued to act as a councillor. 'I he section of the Act hi question reads as follows Upon proof in the first instance by affidavit or otherwise that, the mayor or any councillor has or has become incapable under this Act of holding his office, any magistrate's court may grant a summons calling upon tho person holding such office to show cause why he should not be adjudged to be ousted of the same. ” -Mr F. Calvert appeared to move, in accordance with the motion, that a summons bo issued. His Worship : What is your point? You have got to prove, in the first instance, by affidavit, that the councillor is disqualified. Do you tender this affidavit as proof? .Nlr Calvert; I submit it is prima facie proof—sufficient to call upon the defendant. His Worship; Why do you say he is concerned ? Mr Calvert: He is concerned as a director of the company. In addition, the evidence may be that he is more personally concerned. His Worship : Do you say. because lie is a. director, that he is any more than a shareholder? Mr Calvert: Oh, yes. His Worship: That is your point? Mr Calvert: Yes. His Worship : I presume from your affidavit that Shacklock and Co. is an incorporated company? Mr Calvert: Yes. Tho fact of the word “limited” is sufficient evidence of that. His Worship; You understand that you have to prove your case? Mr Calvert: Of course. His Worship then made an order issuing the summons, which will be returnable to the Magistrate’s Court at 11 a.m. on tho 17th inst., when it will come on for hearing.