LUNCHEON TICKETS

Manawatu Standard, Volume XLIX, Issue 21, 22 December 1928, Page 4

LUNCHEON TICKETS

RESTRICTION ON ISSUE.

FEILDINCr ASSOCIATION DECISION.

(Special to “Standard.”)

FEILDING. Dec. 22

Some two months ago the Feilding A. and P. Association carried a resolution on the motion of Mr E. E. Short, restricting the issue of luncheon tickets at the forthcoming show to officials only, the matter arising out of a report by the treasurer on the growing dimensions of this part of the association’s expenditure. On the occasion of the carrying of the resolution the subject caused a lengthy debate and a good deal of opposition was level at what was termed too drastic a move for a small association such ■as Eeilding to take, and as a sequel to the opposition raised. Mr E. Burrell subsequently gave notice of motion to rescind the resolution, the matter coming before last night’s meeting of the association. Mr J. G. Eliott, the president, was in the chair. Mr Burrell said that he had the affairs of the association at heart in moving ■ the motion, and he thought that it would' bo deterimental to the association to leave the previous motion oil the books. The. association was cutting out a tradition that had been carried along for years by every other association, and he was sure that it would eventually react unfavourably on it. Auckland, Manawatu and other large associations.had discussed , the question and take lie action, and lie was emphatic that it was a matter for the metropolitan associations to take up. For Fending to do so was suicide. Mr L. T. McLean also considered d would be a great mistake to do awaj with the frte tickets which were £ concession to exhibitors. Mr E E. Short, tlve mover of tin

original motion, said that it was not his idea to restrict entirely the issue of tickets; that would be left to an entertainment committee. What he wanted to see stopped was the wliolei sale issue of luncheon tickets to exhibitors who, perhaps, had not paid the price of 'a ticket in entry *ees. Because Manawatu and Auckland Associations had decided against the ! step was no reason why Feildmg i should. He had heard much comment on the matter since the motion ; had been carried and he was sure that > other associations were just looking I for a lead. ■ ... ! Mr H. J. Lancaster agreed with Mi

Burrell lor tne reason wian uk | of tickets was an attraction to exhibitors. He was sure that a restnci tion on the issue of , tickets would weigh against the association. Mr 0. McElroy said that he would like to see Mr Short’s motion stand. It was not the intention of the motion to cut out tickets to exhibitors, but only to visitors and others who were not exhibiting. . Mr N. E. Gifford claimed that the worst aspect of the whole question was that some breeders who brought about six head of stock to the show brought about as many men or boys to loolt after them, and they asked for tickets for them every day. of the show. If this practice could be restricted, he tlrpuglit, the difficulty would be more tliiin half met. , Mr J. Knight thought that the association was not in a strong enough position to risk offending any exhibitors. He certainly wanted to piotect the.affairs of the association but not at "the risk of preventing entries being received'. He pointed out tha ! the' Maiiawatu Association had only I stopped the issue of tickets to exlubi tors whose entry fees wete . under a certain sum. • _ I." + Mr 0. G. C. Dermer was sure that Sir Short’s motion would, antagonise the exhibitors of the district, and he thought it would be a dangerous periment. He would like to see the issue of tickets restricted and he suggested that ,a committee he fd :to go into the matter on -the lines adopted by the Manawatn Association. Mr F. Boddy was m favour of the original motion. He could see no.reason why the association should faj°ur the birr' man who came along with ten 01 twelve head of stock, had a prize list of about £lO and received free luncheon tickets as well. He contended that the association had more to gam than lose by adhering to . the. original motion. Mr B. N. Sandilands said .that the matter had come before the North Island A. and P. Associations’ Conference every year and it had not been dealt with because the conference refused to interfere in the domestic affairs of the individual associations. Personally, he 'failed to see why the big breeders should he specially treated. They went round the main shows purely as an advertisement for their stock and yet they were the biggest offenders in regard to the luncheon tickets. Mr Sandilands held that the association should give the tickets to all or none, and although no association in New Zealand had, as yet made such a step as t-o stop giving; out tickets lie was sure that the move would not be looked upon badly by the exhibitors. If the association got an expression of opinion from all the associations in New Zealand the speaker was certain that 90 per cent, of them would be in favour of cutting out the wholesale issue of tickets, j The chairman said that he was concerned about the resolution. As it stood it was a mandatory resolution confining [the issue of tickets to officials only and i that meant that if the association had any distinguished visitors it could not give them tickets. He was against the step and pointed out that no less than 41 competitors in last year’s show had paid over 30s in entry fees. The point raised by Mr Gifford in regard to an ex-hibition-coming with three or four help-

ers was one that needed consideration, but otherwise the step was a drastic

01 Mr E. P. I: C. Swainson said that for one outside exhibitor who asked i ticket there were three or four local ones with small entries who sought the ticket most. , Mr D. W. Reid said that if the association went round the local business people for donations it could only expect to issue luncheon tickets in leturn to the donors. Mr J. B. Bradley claimed that it was only a matter of time when every association in New Zealand would refuse to indiscriminately issue luncheon tickets. As the seconder of the original motion, he adhered to the abolition o what he termed “a rotten custom. Mr L. J. Wild said that lie had heard no reason from those against the original motion as to why it should be rescinded. As regards the small exhibitor, he pointed out that lie was 01 y going to be asked to pay -s for his luncheon, and if lie could not see his way clear to do it, the speaker was sure that someone else would help him to meet his immediate requirements. Mr JV W. Bramwell, the treasurer of the Association, was pleased to see the committee tackling the question ot a reduction of expenditure in such a manner. As matters stood, the is sue of tickets was becoming a curse to associations and lie thought that it was time the association took a stand, but at the same time lie thoiight that the original motion could_ be modified to allow of the issue of tickets to distinguished guests. Mr Bramwell moved as an amend--1 ment to the motion of which notice 1 was given that the words “but that the ■ president and secretary have power to ■ issue .luncheon tickets to visitors m ' addition to officials” be added to the J motion. , ~ ~ 1 On being put to the meeting the amendment was carried with but two , or three dissentient votes.. The motion as amended was then put as the sub--7 stantative motion and carried iihani--1 mously.