LIMEHILLS

Southland Times, Issue 19461, 28 January 1925, Page 8

LIMEHILLS

TOWN HALL DISPUTE. JUDGMENT RESERVED. The Trustees of the Limehills Hall (Mr Stout) proceeded against John A. Stewart and Thomas Docherty (Mr Walsh) for the sum of £Bl 14/11, the balance of an account held by the Hall Committee of which defendants were Chairman and secretary respectively. The action was a friendly one to decide who should handle the Hall funds. In outlining the case Mr Stout said it was the outcome of a dispute between the Hall Trustees, three of whom were elected by the public and three by the Good Tempter Lodge, which owned the previous hall, and a Hall Committee set up at a public meeting. The Committee had received the balance of the money held when the hall was paid for and had banked the money, Messrs Stewart and Docherty operating on the account. The Trustees were of the opinion that the money belonged to them and so the action was brought. Donald McDonald said that the money held by Messrs Docherty and Stewart had been raised by public subscriptions, bazaars, etc., and should belong to the Trustees. The Trustees never paid out any money over the hall, the old Building Committee handling all the money. To Mr Walsh: The Committee of which Messrs Docherty and Stewart were members, did not handle any money until after the bazaar. In reply to the Magistrate Mr Walsh said that only one banking account, operated upoh by Docherty and Stewart, had been opened and this had served all the time. Re-examined witness said he did not know of any banking operating before the Committee was appointed. John A. Stewart, storekeeper, said he was secretary of the Committee which held about £Bl. He was also a trustee as well as a committeeman. The account was opened up in July, but there was no account before that. The builder was paid in cash. The balance now in the bank was really the balance of the old building account. To Mr Walsh: A Management Committee was appointed to control the hall, and when the appointment was made no objections were made by the Trustees. No mention was made of finance, although Docherty and witness opened the account and operated on Re-examined he said the Good Templars were not represented on the public Committee, although the Lodge had insisted upon equal representation in the trustees. To Mr Walsh: The night the Committee was formed, improvements such as lavatories, etc., were discussed verbally and the improvements approved. Mr Stout: The public meeting approved of the improvements, not the Trustees as a body? Witness: Yes. James Docherty, lime kiln proprietor, said he was Chairman of the Committee which was appointed to control the hall in July last. All members of the Committee had been energetic in raising funds for the hall. Several suggested improvements were discussed that night, and the most essential picked out for immediate attention. The funds were then banked and the account operated upon by Stewart and witness. This was approved of generally, but at an old meeting a resolution was passed that no one could vote unless he had subscribed £1 to the hall funds. One member of the Hall Committee had not paid the necessary fee, and that was the cause of all the bother. The public did not want the Trustees to have full control of the hall, and that was why the Committee would not hand over the balance of the account. His Worship said he did not see what else there was to do to the hall, and the whole matter appeared to be a fight as to who should have the honour of signing the cheques. He would look carefully into the matter and give a written judgment, but he was inclined to think the Trustees were entitled to the money.