Conisboro’ Parish Council

The usual monthly meeting of this authority was held in the Station Road Board School, on Monday night, when there were present Messrs. Brockleby (in the chair), Robinson, Smithson, Singleton, Brook, Baker, and Wilson; with Mr. J. Hawkesworth (clerk), Mr. A. Hodgson (cemetery caretaker), and Mr. Jones (captain of the Fire Brigade). The minutes of the Burial Committee were read and approved. A cheque for £5 15s. 6d. was drawn in favour of the caretaker.

Mr. Singleton called attention to the state of the cemetery footpaths, which, he said, required attention, and suggested that a committee be appointed to go into the matter. Mr. Baker, addressing Messrs. Singleton and Smithson, suggested that as they had been out of work so long, they should carry out the work and earn the gratitude of the parish. (Laughter.) Mr. Smithson: Sixpence an hour? Mr. Singleton: I will do a day if Mr. Baker will do the same. (Laughter.) Mr. Baker said he had to work for his money, and could not spare the time. (Laughter.) Eventually Messrs. Baker and Wilson, with the manager, were appointed as a committee to consider the matter.

Regarding the application from the Conisboro’ Gas Co. and their application for powers under the Gas and Water Works Facilities Act, which was considered at the last meeting, Mr. Baker stated that he and the Clerk had waited upon Mr. Kilner (chairman of the Gas Co.) and Mr. Pickford (solicitor), of Rotherham, and enquired whether, in the event of the Council giving their consent, the Council would endanger their rights in the event of any electricity or other syndicate wishing to lay mains in the township. The reply received was to the effect that the Council’s rights were not interfered with, the Gas Co. having no intention to apply anything save gas works pure and simple.

Mr. Brooks said he thought they were dealing with the Conisboro’ Company alone, but it appeared there were two companies concerned—the Conisboro’ Gas Co. and the Denaby and Cadeby Main Collieries Co. Under those circumstances he could not support the granting of the request, and would like particulars as to the agreement between the two companies. Mr. Robinson also expressed misgivings as to the agreement, and said he should like to know more of it. Mr. Baker contended that any agreement between the two companies would not have a prejudicial effect on the Council, or had nothing to do with them. On Mr. Baker’s motion, the permission applied for was given, Mr. Robinson alone not voting.

Mr. Jones (captain) put in a list of various requisites for the Brigade, as requested by the Council, and these were allowed.

Vice-Chairman of the Council Accused of Causing Obstruction – Resolution Rejected

The Chairman, glancing at the agenda, said the next business concerned himself, because Mr. Baker had thought fit to use his (the speaker’s) name in connection with the matter. If it had concerned any other member he should have ruled it out of order, for the matter had been under the consideration of the Council twice before, was discussed last two months ago, and by rights could not be brought up again until six months had passed. But in case Mr. Baker should think he (Mr. Brockleby) was taking advantage of his position, he would place himself in the hands of the Council as to whether it was out of order or not.

A discussion followed, and the Clerk said the resolution was out of order, but, on Mr. Baker promising that he would not bring up the matter again if it was settled that night, Mr. Brockleby elected to have it dealt with there and then, vacating the chair, in spite of a friendly protest that there was no need by Mr. Baker, and Mr. Jones (captain of the Fire Brigade) was asked to occupy it.

Mr. Baker then moved “that Mr. John Brockleby, vice-chairman of this Council, be directed to remove the obstruction, caused by him, from the highway that adjoins his property in Brook Square, Conisboro’.” He said this was a little matter he looked upon as very serious indeed, so far as the Council were concerned. Here they had a vice-chairman of the Council letting his stables and bakehouse to two gentlemen, adjoining Brook Square. There was one cart for the houses in the stables, but not for the carts, which formed an obstruction in the public highway. He moved that Mr. Brockleby be asked to remove the obstruction.

A short silence ensued, and then Mr. Brockleby rose and said: I will second the resolution, as no one else appears inclined to. Not that I presume to support it—(laughter)—but simply to have the matter settled once and for all.

Mr. Baker said some one would have seconded it, if you had not been in such a hurry.

Mr. Brockleby said he waited, but no one appeared likely to second the resolution, so he did.

Replying to it, Mr. Brockleby first introduced a clever and imaginative sketch of the various councillors visiting the property, and one remark referring to heaven brought Mr. Baker to his feet with “You have no right to bring heaven in the discussion.”

Mr. Smithson said it is only a bit of Shakespeare.

Mr. Brockleby, however, concluded his story of the Council’s visit in the words: “I awoke, it was a dream,” and proceeded to give an emphatic denial as to his responsibility in the matter, and said it was time it was settled, and that he was glad they were going to do so that night. Continuing, he said he let the property in question many years ago, and the one conveyance his tenant then had could be sheltered, and he disclaimed the responsibility of any conveyances that had since been obtained. Another point, he contended, was the 14 feet of roadway was ample, considering the little traffic on the old road, and the property in question was not in Brook Square.

Mr. Baker: Not in Brook Square?

Mr. Brockleby said there had been no obstruction in Brook Square.

The Chairman, considering, said the District Council would have nothing to do with the road in question, and the Surveyor had not the road scheduled on his books. It has been decided that it is a County Council road, and the cost will come out of the county rate. It was a matter that did not concern them.

Mr. Singleton called attention to the fact that there were other obstructions in the road, and asked why Mr. Baker had not made a clean sweep of the lot.

Mr. Baker: You are out of order.

Mr. Brooks contended there was an obstruction, and that somebody must be responsible for it.

Mr. Robinson said I have supported Mr. Baker, but after hearing what has been said, I am afraid I cannot.

Mr. Wilson supported Mr. Brockleby, and was of opinion that the resolution was simply personal spite on the part of Mr. Baker, and that was the reason he could not support Mr. Brockleby.

Mr. Baker said I am very sorry indeed I have been accused of bringing this matter forward out of spite. I give you my word as a man and a gentleman that I have not, and I am more than surprised that Mr. Wilson should accuse me of such a petty thing. I brought the matter forward purely in the interests of justice.

On the motion being put to the vote it was lost, with the exception of Messrs. Baker and Brook, the former voting for it and the latter seconding same.