South Yorkshire Times — Friday, 15 June 1934
Conisboro’ U.D.C.
Rent Expert
Dropped From Rent Restriction Committee
Labour Group Twitted
A motion by Mr. John Webster, to rescind a minute of the annual meeting of the Conisborough Urban Council that the Rent Restrictions Act Sub-Committee should be comprised only of members of the Council, was the principal subject of discussion at the Council’s monthly meeting on Wednesday. Mr. G. A. Chadfield (vice-chairman) presided.
Mr. Webster said he wished to draw attention to the “remarkable attitude” of the Labour Party who co-opted members to sub-committees only when it was convenient for themselves.
Mr. H. Gomersall: “We are entitled to do as we like, and Mr. Webster has nothing to do with it.”
Mr. Webster said the attitude taken with regard to Mr. J. Leatherland (who is excluded from the Rent Restrictions Sub-Committee by the Council’s decision) appeared quite indefensible. Mr. Leatherland had taken up cases for 107 tenants who had overpaid rent, up to May 21st, and had been instrumental in recovering for them a total of over £100. As a result of his efforts these tenants were paying a total of £3 16s. 1½d. per week less and the average decrease for each tenant was 8½d. per week. From May 21st to June 4th Mr. Leatherland recovered £7 8s. 6d. for 12 tenants, who were now paying an average of 6d. per week less. He had “stolen the thunder” of the Labour Party and had done for working men what the Labour Party said they would do. “He has shown some practical sympathy for the working man, and I cannot for the life of me see why he has not been co-opted on to this committee. He has proved of service to men not capable of understanding this complicated Act.”
Mr. H. H. Wray seconded. “I still feel,” he said, “that they left off a man who almost more than any other man in this room understands this Rent Act. He has made the study of it his hobby. If we can use him we ought to do so.”
Mr. G. Oldfield said the person under discussion had approached landlords saying he had the authority of the Council to compel them to adjust rents. This was causing considerable ill-feeling between landlord and tenant. Privileges like folk-keeping which had previously been permitted had been lost through this interference. These matters should be settled by amicable agreement between landlord and tenant. Furthermore, although the number of cases won had been mentioned, those lost, which amounted to just as many, had not been referred to.
Mr. J. Leatherland, who was present in the Council Chamber, here called out: “Speak the truth.”
Mr. J. T. E. Collins said members of the Council had not the time to acquire the specialised knowledge of Mr. Leatherland. He questioned the statement that as many cases had been lost as won. Landlords were capable of having rents adjusted according to the Act if they had adjustment was in their favour, but if the Act operated against them and a member of the public enlightened the tenants on the subject that was no reason why the landlords should take away amenities previously allowed. He thought they ought to co-opt members, and suggested that if the person referred to had been a member of the Labour Party he would have been put on the committee.
Mr. D. Sheldon said that although working men they had not time to acquire specialised knowledge. They had no Clerk (Mr. Spencer Baker), a man who could direct them if they needed guidance. It was not the place of the Rent Restriction Committee to put landlord against tenant and tenant against landlord.
Mr. Webster said that practically all the previous cases had been brought by Mr. Leatherland. There was no unjust interference if a man got back an unjust payment.
Mr. Oldfield mentioned that free booklets on the Act could be had on application at the Council offices.
The motion was defeated by 7 votes to three.
A letter was received from the Denaby Unemployed Social Club asking if when the Council had any work to give out, they would give members of the club their consideration.
The Chairman: Everyone will be taken into consideration.
Ambulance Charges.
Moving confirmation of the minutes of the Sanitary and Highways Committee, Mr. H. Gomersall said the Committee had had before them a suggestion to run the ambulance for residents of Conisborough without charging for its use. It was found, however, that this would mean budgeting for £150 a year. Instead of £20. That would be equivalent to a ¾d. rate, and it was resolved that no alteration in present procedure be recommended. It had been decided, however, to reduce the minimum charge for a journey to Doncaster from 10s. 6d. to 7s. 6d.
Tip Trespass.
Mr. Gomersall also referred to the damage done to the Council’s refuse tip. Notices had been placed on the tip, and people were afterwards found trespassing, and it was eventually decided to prosecute one man who had been previously warned. The Council were not anxious to prosecute people, but were anxious to see that this tip, which might sooner or later be classed as reclaimed land, should be preserved.
Appeal to Public.
Drawing attention to a minute of the Allotments Committee that 80 yards of fencing be erected on the north side of the Wadworth Street allotments at a cost of £16, Mr. Wray said that when ratepayers broke down fences they should remember that they themselves had to pay for the replacement. He appealed to the people of that district to help to protect the new fences.
The Fire Brigade.
Moving confirmation of the minutes of the Fire Brigade Committee, Mr. R. H. Shepherd referred to the appointment of Mr. C. Ledger as a sergeant of the brigade.
The Chairman said the nomination had come from the Conisborough section of the brigade only.
The Conisborough section wanted a sergeant at their own end to act as a fire-bucket out there.
Mr. Gomersall: “I wonder why members of the fire brigade run after councillors and raise a complaint about something they have the right to settle among themselves. When I have met the firemen they have always seemed a happy family, and I fail to see why there should be any friction.”
Race With a Beetle.
Mr. Webster noted that they were fitting ten more classes of children at the baths, and asked if they would get clean water any more frequently. He had been in the baths the previous day and had twice had a “race with a beetle.”
Mr. Gomersall: “Well, press for the filtration plant.”
Increased Assessment.
Submitting the recommendations of the Finance Sub-Committee, Mr. Gomersall stated the Council’s officers had been instructed to oppose the increase of assessment on the Council’s sewage works from £40 to £660 proposed by the Don Valley Assessment Committee.