The Star. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1919. SUNDAY CONCERTS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 12758, 30 September 1919, Page 6

The Star. TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 1919. SUNDAY CONCERTS.

The complaint of some Labour members of the City Council that the Bylaws Committee, in their recommendations regarding Sunday concerts, had reversed a previous decision of the council was not altogether without foundation. The circumstances of the original discussion may profitably bo recalled. A deputation from the Professional Musicians’ Union waited on the council with a request for permission to hold concerts on Sunday evenings. It was pointed out that if they were to be financially self-supporting there would have to be something more than the usual voluntary contribution, and proposals were made that power to reserve seats at a moderate fee should he given. This proposition was debated at considerable length, and the council adopted an amendment brought forward by Councillor Sullivan that the request should bo granted, subject to conditions to bo framed by the council. The amendment was carried by seven votes to six. The intention obviously was that the By-lawa Committee should draft conditions which would meet- the request of the deputation, and introduce an entirely new principle in regard to Sunday concerts in Christchurch. Instead of producing bread, however, the committee offered a stone, which may be flung back at it by the Musicians’ Union. The committee flouted the previous decision of the council, as it ignored the implied direction that permission should be given to reserve a proportion of the seats at a fixed fee. The original opposition was strengthened last night by the accession of three votes from Councillors Peek, Harper and Agar, while the supporters of the concerts got an extra vote from the Mayor. The result was that the council went back on the decision of the previous fortnight, the raajodvv of one being converted into a minority of one. There is a demand in Christchurch for concerts of the kind which the Musicians’ Union proposed to give, and we do not think that the council would have gone far astray if it had adhered to its original determination to the permission asked for. When the city organ recitals were held the council did not haggle at the fee to the organist, and if it was right in principle to pay an organist for his recitals the very modest payment to the members of the orchestra which was proposed cannot be wrong in principle. The council, it is true, had to meet any deficiency on the recitals, but it would be unfair to ask a small body of musicians to run risks which may be faced without dread by a wealthy local body. It was necessary that the Musicians’ Union should be assured of a fair financial return, and the proposal they made to the council was not an unreasonable one. To suggest that the payment of ten shillings per concert to the members of the orchestra betrays the cloven hoof of mercenary!am >> jg snrely stretching things a little.