Skip to main content

Full text of "Commissioner's report in the matter of the Municipal Act and in the matter of the municipal corporation of the town of Collingwood"

See other formats


r 



IN THE ^ATTER OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT 




- and - 



IN THE MATTER OF THB MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE TOM OF 

COLLINGWOOD. 



COMMISSIONER'S 



R2P0RT 









IN THB MATTER OP THE MUNICIPAL ACT 
-and- 
IN THE MATTER OP THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD 



TO: THE HONOURABLE HBRB5RT ALEXANDER BRUCE , 

a Colonel in The Royal Army Medical Corps, Fellow 
of The Royal College of Surgeons of England, &c, 
LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIO, 

May it Please Your Honour: 

Pursuant to the powers vested in me under the commission issued to me 
and "bearing date the Fourth day of February, A.D. 1937, I have inquired into 
the financial affairs of the Municipal Corporation of the Town of Collingwood, 
particularly into the financial matters specifically set out in the said com- 
mission, and herein respectfully submit my report. 

Before attending at the Town of Collingwood to conduct a public hear- 
ing, I directed the Clerk of the Municipality to post up in the town hall and 
in four other prominent places in the Town, the following notice: 

PUBLIC NOTICE 
The Municipal Act. 
The Public Inquiries Act. 
IN THE MATTER OF THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF COLLINGWOOD 

Notice is hereby given that pursuant to an Order-in-Council 
dated the 4th day of February, A.D. 1937, the undersigned has been 
commissioned to inquire into the financial affairs of the Municipal 
Corporation of the Town of Collingwood. 

The undersigned Commissioner will therefore hold a sittings 
at the town hall in the Town of Collingwood commencing on Wednesday 
the 10th day of February, A.D. 1937, for the purpose of inquiring in- 
to the several matters as authorized by the said Order-in-Council» 

Let all persons interested then attend. 

DATED this 6th day of February, A.D. 1937. 

(Signed) W. D. Roach 
Commissioner 

At the commencement of the inquiry, the Clerk reported to me that he 
had complied with these directions. 

I held a public inquiry in the court room in the town hall in the 
Town of Collingwood on the following dates - February 10th, 11th, 12th, 23rd, 
24th, 25th, 26th, 27th, March 1st and March 2nd. Mr. Joseph J. Hood acted 
as commission counsel; Mr. H. H. Fair, Solicitor, represented the Municipali- 
ty and Mr. J. R. Boys acted as counsel for Mayor Kohl, L. B. Borland and 
Norman E. Ruppert ( members of the 1935 and 1936 Councils ), at the 



- 2 - 



sittings held on February 10th, 11th and 12th and Mr. John Woods acted as 
counsel for these men at all the subsequent hearings. 

I acknowledge the valuable assistance of Mr. Hood in the presenta- 
tion of the evidence, generally. Mr. Boys and latterly Mr. Woods directed 
their efforts towards the presentation of such additional evidence as they 
thought beneficial to their clients. All evidence was taken under oath. I 
permitted a wide latitude in the examination and cross-examination of all the 
witnesses and more than once during the inquiry, I announced that any persons 
having any information which they thought should come to my attention, should 
confer with the commission counsel. 

The following general information was given in evidence:- 
Population of Collingwood 



1911 


4M 


7090 


1921 


- 


5882 


1931 


- 


5730 


1932 


- 


5788 


1933 


- 


5536 


1934 


fP 


5416 


1935 


- 


5749 


1936 


- 


5498 


Debenture 


Debt 





As of December 31, 1932 - $ 1,003,499.10 

As of December 31, 1933 - 992,658.52 

As of December 31, 1934 - 1,034,087,62 

As of December 31, 1935 - 985,968.79 

As of December 31, 1936 - 935,369.31 

Detailed Statement of the Debenture Debt as at December 31, 1936 

(See Schedule 1, in the appendix hereto) 

Detailed Statement for the years 1932 to 1936 inclusive, showing 
total assessment, taxable assessment, tax rate, taxes levied 

(See Schedule 2, in the appendix hereto) 

Re Collection of Tax Arrears 

Total Tax Arrears Collected - 

1932 - $18,329.48 & applied on 1931 arrears - §10,881.44 & applied on 

arrears prior to 1931 - $7,448.04 

1933 - $24,443.51 & applied on 1932 arrears - $11,998.94 & applied on 

arrears prior to 1932 - $12,444.57 

1934 - $25,542.36 & applied on 1933 arrears - Not reported & applied on 

arrears prior to 1933 ? 

1935 - $26,397.21 & applied on 1934 arrears - $ 6,830.82 & applied on 

arrears prior to 1934 - $19,566.39 

1936 - $44,679.61 & applied on 1935 arrears - $21,623.98 & applied on 

arrears prior to 1935 - $23,055.66 



Digitized by the Internet Archive 

in 2011 with funding from 

Ontario Council of University Libraries 



http://www.archive.org/details/b249487 



-3- 



x - The large amount of tax arrears collected in 1936 Is 
accounted for by the practise adopted of cancelling 
or "rebating" part of the arrears in consideration 
of the taxpayer paying less than the total arrears. 
It is not due to any improvement in local conditions 
and probably will result in an added burden of 
taxes in succeeding years. The details of this 
practise, which is entirely illegal, are explained 
in this report under the heading "rebates and Can- 
cellations of Taxes" hereinafter contained. 



In earlier years there we»e several thriving industries which gave 
considerable employment to residents of the Town. Nearly all these are now 
idle and, apparently, there is no immediate prospect of them re-opening. To- 
day these plants stand as ghost-like monuments of better days. Prominent 
among these is the shipbuilding plant, which at one time employed an average of 
one hundred and fifty (150) men the year round. Today, there are only one or 
two small industries employing only a comparatively few men. The large number 
of vacant buildings on the main street of the town - substantially built two 
and three story brick buildings comprising stores on the ground floor and 
either public halls or living apartments above - is mute evidence of the town's 
serious decline. The proximity of "Wasaga Beach" provides some increased 
business for the merchants during the summer months, but this is only seasonal. 
Apart from the foregoing, the town depends for its support upon the agricultur- 
al area which surrounds it. The results that have flowed from this condition 
are manifold and obvious: 

(1) A serious relief situation due to unemployment. The number on 
relief reached its peak in February, 1936. 

(2) An accumulation of tax arrears. 

(3) Values of real property greatly depressed. In some instances, 
the rental value is considerably less than the annual taxes. 

(4) The town being unable to dispose of some properties at tax 
sales for lack of bidders and eventually the town acquired 
these properties. 

(5) As properties were acquired by the Municipality, they were 
removed from the assessment roll and the burden of taxation 
was correspondingly increased on other property. 

(6) In some cases, properties owned by the town were occupied by 
people - either the original owners or others - on welfare 
and the town received no relief rent. 

At the beginning of 1936, the municipality owned about fifty 
(50) private residences. About forty-five (45) of these 
were occupied by families on relief. At the same time, there 
were about twenty-five (25) vacant residences privately owned. 
During the year, the council made a concentrated effort to 
place the relief tenants who were occupying residences owned 
by the municipality in residences which were privately owned 



- 4 - 



and to rent these residences owned "by the municipality to cash 
tenants. A list of properties owned "by the municipality from 
which the council had relief tenants removed and which they 
rented to cash tenants in 1936 as follows: 



Allison, 0* 



Pts. 1-2 W. Market 



Rentals 
$ 1.00 



Costello, P. 
Cousins, 0. 



58-59 W. Napier 



10.00 
7.00 



Deacy, P. 

Duggan, L. 



Pt. 11 W. Pine 
56 W. Hurontario 



6.00 
5.00 



Blyes, Mrs. P, 



11 W. Spruce 



7.00 



Geary, M. 
Green, D. 
Griffin, Mrs, 



Pt. 58 S. Huron 
45 E. Cedar 
8 W. Raglan 



3.00 
6.00 
7.00 



Hall, Mrs. 
Hall, Frances 
Henry, Geo. 
Howard, B. 



Pts. 19-20 3. Pine 
7 3. Ste. Marie 
26 W. Hurontario 
Pts. 19-20 E. Pine 



7.00 

5.00 

10.00 

7.00 



Karnahan, Flore 
Lang, A. 



3 E. Ste. Marie 



Pt. 12 B. St. Peter 



7.00 
7.00 



Miron, A. 
Morrill, A. 



Pts. 1-2 E. Ste. Marie 
26 W. Hurontario 



10.00 
5.00 



Spooner, J.C. 
Staples, A.F. 



Town Hall 
31-53 B. Maple 



30.00 
12.00 



White, Geo. 
White, W.P. 



Pt. 16 W. Spruce 
Pts. 19-20 B. Pine 



8.00 
7.00 



The result of this shifting of tenants is obvious. 

The following is a list of property owned "by the municipality through 



tax sales and sold "by the municipality in 1936, 



Paid 



To Pay 



H. Saunders 


Pt. 14 T. St. Paul 


103.50 




Willison, C. 


H (Furniture) 


5.00 




Heron, J as. 


it n 


1.00 




Thompson, Mrs. A. 


Pt. 37 W. Hurontario 


132.00 


232.00 


Spreale, Mrs. I.G. 


8 E. Ste. Marie 


60.00 


790.00 


tt n 


35-36 W. Oak 


211.10 




n tt 


Pt. 2 S. Collins 


111.36 


168.64 


tt tt 


8-9 W. Market 

(Pt. 29 B. Ontario) 


84.58 


107.42 




(31 W. Ste. Marie) 


90.00 




P® ss » C • C • 


Pt. 42 3. Pine 


300.00 




Johnson, M. 


Pt. 2 S. Collins 


115.20 


1,084.80 


Graham, W.J. 


45 B. Pine 


325.00 




Mc Cut che on, Sam 


Pt. 19-20 E. Spruce 


34.08 


238.66 


Elder., Fred 


42 IT. Simcoe 


50.00 


1,300.00 


Harrison, Joe. 


40 B. Oak 


5.00 




Whiteside, Jas. 


44 E. Minnesota 


36.30 


326.70 


Hilts, Fred 


15 S. Bodney 


100.00 




Stephenson, T. 


Cameron Strip W. Balsam 


50.00 


v<j#u4 


» » 


Pt. 19 B. Hurontario 


150.00 


981.73 


t* » 


3-5 ff. Fourth 


100.00 


699.46 



Appro*. 
Annual Taxes 



30.00 

75.00 
350.00 



75.00 

150.00 

35.00 

48.00 

100.00 

40.00 

250.00 



Forward - 



$2,064.12 $6,042.75 



$1,153,00 



- 5 - 



Seigell, Jean 
Pelch, A. 
Carmichael,R.V. 
Frye, Mrs, E. 
Teskey, J.J. 
Raymond, R. 
McQuarrie, A. 
Thomas, Jose. 
Dey, W.P. 
Warren, Mrs. 
Nobes, J.H. 
Sheffield, W. 
Dougherty, Ed. 
Lightheart, W. 
McGaugherty,Mrs, 
Willi son, F. 
Reid, Geo. 
Serannage, T. 



22 E. Spruce 
Pt. 1 E.St. Paul 
Pt.6-7 N.Sixth 
18 W.Robinson 
Pt. 50 W. Birch 
4 S. East 
20 W. Spruce 
35-35 N. Eighth 
34. W. Ste. Marie 
16 S. Rodney 
3^-35 W. Patterson 
20 N. Seventh 
Pt. 18 W. Birch 
1-2 N. Erie 
Pt. 19 W. Birch 
Pt. 9 E. St. Paul 
22 W. Maple 



19-20 S. Fifth 
0»Wood Creamery Pts. 55-56 W.Ste. Marie 
Smithson, W. S. Seventh N. Eighth 



An Analysis of this list will show that the total annual taxes 
levied against these properties is about 10% of the purchase price. 







Approx. 


Paid 


Ip pay 


Annual Taxes 


$2,064.12 


$6,042.75 


$1,153.00 


6.00 






18.00 




10.00 


5.00 






79.00 


121.00 


30.00 


50.00 


450.00 


45.00 


50.00 




30.00 


6.00 






2.50 


128.99 


20.00 


61.00 


25.24 


15.00 


24.00 


201.00 


25.00 


20.00 




10.00 


29*75 


188.90 


25.00 


54.15 


70.85 


35.00 


12.00 


? 




250.00 




45.00 


20.00 


250.00 


35.00 


100.00 


125.00 


80.00 


8.00 


342.00 


45.00 


.e 216.62 


250.00 
150.00 


75.00 


I3.082.U 


$8,525.73 . 


$1,678.00 



Comparative L Statement of Relief Costs . 



1934 
1935 
1936 



$ 122,015.05 

117,122.86 

97,399.69 



The foregoing information shows in a general way the financial posi- 
tion of the municipality and its financial problems. 

Furing my investigation, however, my attention was particularly 
directed to the specific matters set forth in my commission and I now report 
on them as follows: 



"A" 



REBATES AND CANCELLATIONS OF TAXES, PENALTIES. AND INTEREST WHICH MAI HAVE BEEN 

MADE OR DIRECTED BY ANY BODY OR PERSON DURING THE YEARS 1935 
AND 1956 „__„__ 

The council of the Town of Collingwood at a regular meeting held on 

December 9th, 1935, passed the following resolution, vie:- 

w That the tax collector be and he is hereby empowered to deal with all 
matters pertaining to the collection of taxes, to have power to rebate 
penalties and to adjust arrears. That all adjustments of importance 
are to be submitted to the Finance Committee for confirmation." 

Acting on the apparent authority of this resolution, the tax collector, some- 
times alone and sometimes with the assistance of Mayor Kohl, after he came 
into office in January, 1936, made settlements with a very large number of 



-6- 



taxpayers in the following manner :- 

(1) In some instances, he made a cash settlement with the taxpayer, that 
is, he accepted in cash, in full payment of the arrears, a sum less 
than was owing and purported to cancel the "balance of the amount 
owing; 

(2) In other instances, he made an agreement in writing with the tax- 
payer, whereby part of the arrears were to "be cancelled and the 
"balance was to "be paid on the instalment plan. 

Having made these so called settlements, two lists were made, ap- 
parently in the town clerks office, the one showing the cash settlements and 
the other the agreements as to postponed payments. These were submitted to a 
meeting of the Court of Revision and, purporting to act under Section 131 of 
The Assessment Act, the Court of Revision approved the settlements made by the 
tax collector. In the case of the cash settlements, it allowed as a "rebate" 
the difference between the amount which the collector had received from each 
taxpayer and the total arrears and in the cases where the collector had made 
agreements with the taxpayer, it allowed as a "rebate" the amount which the 
collector had assumed to cancel, but "subject to owners fulfilling their 
agreement and failing to carry out their agreement, such agreement shall be 
null and void". The first groups thus dealt with came before the Court of 
Revision at a meeting held on February 27th, 1936, and covered the settlements 
made from November 19th, 1935 to February 27th, 1936. The Court of Revision 
had absolutely no jurisdiction to grant these re/b atea . In the first place, no 
written application was made by the person assessed and secondly, the arrears 
thus dealt with were for the year 1934 and earlier years. The cases thus 
dealt with at that meeting are set forth in Part One of Schedule A, appended 
hereto, which shows the total "rebates" or cancellations as amounting to 
$ 5094,07 , Even a cursory glance at this schedule will at once show that there 
was no u niform rate applied in making these cancellations or "rebates". In 
this respect, no two taxpayers were treated alike. In view of the obvious ir- 
regularity and considering the lengthy list of cases thus dealt with, I did 
not inquire into the merits of each case. To do so would have consumed too 
much time, I did, however, inquire generally as to the manner in which the 
collector arrived at the amount of the settlement. He would, apparently, talk 
to the taxpayer and make what he considered a good bargain. In some instances, 
however, the evidence shows, there were chattels on which he could have dis- 
trained, much more than sufficient to satisfy the arrears; in other instances, 



-7- 



the property even at the depressed values in the town was worth many times the 
total arrears and in some instances too, the person assessed had considerable 
financial substances, so that "by suit the municipality could have recovered the 
full arrears. 

Then, at a special meeting of the council held on February 7th, 1936, 

the following resolution was passed:- 

"That the finance and town property committee he given power to sell 

town property and to adjust tax arrears where seen to be in the 

best interests of the town and that all such settlements be sub- 
mitted for the approval of the Court of Revision." 

Prom that date until April 30th, 1936, the tax collector apparently 
acted under the instructions of the finance committee and during this period, 
as in the earlier period, settlements were made with a large number of tax- 
payers who owed tax arrears, - some cash settlements and some settlements in- 
volving payments in instalments - in all of which varying amounts were can- 
celled or rebated. Then, at a meeting of the Court of Revision held on May 
1st, 1936, these so called settlements were confirmed and in the case of the 
cash settlements, the amounts which had been paid were accepted in full and the 
balance "rebated" and in the other cases, the settlements were "granted pro- 
vided owners complete terms of agreement". The cases thus dealt with at that 
meeting are set forth in Part Two of Schedule A hereto appended, which shows 
the total rebates or cancellations as amounting to $1521.92. In these cases, 
as in those dealt with by the Court of Revision on February 27th, there was no 
written application by the person assessed and for this and the other reasons 
to which I have referred with reference to "rebates" granted at that earlier 
sitting of the Court of Revision, the Court of Revision had no authority under 
Section 121 of the Assessment Act. Likewise, no representations were made to 
tjiat Court and it simply approved the lists as handed to it by the Clerk of the 
town. 

Then, following that same practise, the tax collector, under the 
supervision of the finance committee, continued to grant "rebates" or can- 
cellations, subject to the approval of the Court of Revision. The list of 
"rebates" thus granted are set forth in Part Three of Schedule A appended here- 
to, which shows them as totalling $6474.20. These, however, have not been 
submitted to the Court of Revision. 






- 8 - 



I, therefore, find that the total sum set forth in Schedule A, via: 
|15,090.19, is still owing to the municipality notwithstanding these attempted 
"rebates" • 

It was shown in evidence that in or about March, 1936, Mr. Gray, a 
representative of the Department of Municipal Affairs, visited the Town of 
Collingwood and in a conference with the town solicitor and the then tax 
collector, stated that the practise which was then being followed with respect 
to these "rebates" was improper and should be discontinued. Neither the soli- 
cit or nor th e tax collector reported this to the council as they should have 
done and as no doubt Jir, Gray assumed they would do. Some members of the 
council heard about it, but the other members disclaimed any knowledge of it# 



- 9 - 



SCHEDULE "1" 



Part One 



Cash Set tlements November. 1955 to February 1956 . 



NAME 


PROPERTY 


ARREARS 


PAID 


REBATE 


Pegg, Ann 


St. Lawrence 


101.20 


75.00 


26.20 


Ridgway, Jno. 


Robinson 


26.17 


25.00 


5.17 


Shervood, J.R. 


Sixth 


9.28 


7.00 


2.28 


Gordon, Hugh 


Fifth 


109.67 


42.50 


4.25 


Wilde, P. 


Simcoe 


21.80 


15.00 


6.80 


Park, Alex 


Birch 


176.55 


54.00 


5.40 


Dillon, A. 


Robinson 


56.50 


55.00 


5.50 


Serrannage, T. 


Hurontario 


87.89 


79.90 


7.99 


Webb, T. 


Market 


64.04 


45.58 


20.66 


finite, Roy 


Front 


20.24 


18.40 


1.84 


Montgomery, W.fi. 


Maple 


211.45 


120.70 


90.75 


Currie, R. 


Eighth 


505.44 


128.75 


176.69 


Ball, E. 


Hurontario 


594.00 


500.00 


294.00 


Calbronson, 0. 


Hurontario 


115.70 


95.00 


18.70 


Johnson, Mrs. C. 


Ontario 


59.82 


56.22 


5.60 


Smith, W.L. 


Market 


152.10 


65.80 


66.50 


Lawson, Emma 


Balsam 


5.65 


5.41 


.22 


Baptist Church 


Beech 


125.68 


100.00 


25.68 


Idullholland, Mrs, 


Beech 


171.85 


48.00 


8.77 


Lunan, C.B. 


Napier 


a. 25 


57.60 


5.65 


Lanktree, T. 


Ste. Marie 


219.75 


102.00 


117.75 


Page, F. 


Market 


55.71 


18.00 


.71 


Wheatley, R. 


Business 


52.00) 






Wheatley, H. 


Hurontario 


554.60) 


580.00 


75.55 


Wheatley, H. 


Oak 


68.75) 






Day, W.P. 


Business 


45.89( 






Day, W.P. 


Ste. Marie 


91.95( 


220.70 


5.14 


Day, W.P. 


Napier 


88.00( 






Oliphant, F. 


Ste. Marie 


110.85 


50.00 


1.85 


Eldon, F. 


Ste. Marie 


75.54 


14.00 


50.00 


Eldon, K. 


Ste. Marie 


109.75 




55.00 


Knight, Est. 


Minnesota 


125.68 


125.00 


.68 


Hilt », A. 


Birch 


56.58 


25.00 


.90 


McKecknie, D. 


Ste. Marie 


281.52 


175.00 


106.52 


Leggatt, S.W. 


Raglan 


128.50 


100.00 


28.50 


Leggatt, S.W. 


Erie 


119.50 


100.00 


19.50 


Neville, P. 


Birch 


89.25 


50.80 


5.55 


Occomore, F. 


Beech 


155.58 


62.48 


4.70 


Godden, F. 


Minnesota 


55.00) 






Goddon, F. 


Patterson 


27.50) 


126.00 


50.75 


Goddon, F. 


St. Paul 


74.25) 






McCutcheon, R. 


Birch 


8.80 


5.00 


5.60 


Ellie, L. 


Hickory 


17.55 


15.00 


2.55 


Thompson, S. 


Maple 


159.95 


15.69 


17.50 


Holden, S. 


Napier 


9.65) 






Holden, S. 


Minnesota 


77.00) 


65.00 


21.65 


Wheeler, J. 


Huron 


127.051 






Wheeler, J. 


St. Paul 


110. 00 ( 


200.00 


48.05 


Bronw, Jennie 


Pine 


58.00 


25.00 


15.00 


National Trust 


Pine 


46.99 


9.40 


.45 


Fair, D.S. 


Birch 


15.07 


12.00 


1.07 


Miller, Amos 


Walnut 


10.45 


5.00 


.70 


Duncan, J.H. 


Robinson 


5.80) 






Duncan, J.H. 


Baker 


6.58) 


19.00 


4.49 


Duncan J.H. 


Collins 


15.11) 






Stout enbur g , J . . 


Ste. Marie 


251.70 


150.00 


81.70 


Ball, Jos. 


Birch 


21.55 


10.00 


11.55 


Sherwood, R. 


Seventh 


16.77 


4.00 


1.22 


Condy, Isabella 


First 


58.00 


28.00 


10.60 


Brownridge, A.N. 


Hurontario 


144.00) 






Brownridge, A.N. 


Ste. Marie 


565. B%) 


250.00 


457.81 


Kimmerly, F.E. 


Birnies Island 


9.50 


8.85 


47 



$1,900.58 



-10- 



PART ONE - REBATES SUBJECT TO OWNERS FULFILLING CONDITIONS OF SETTLEMENT 



Na:ue 



Property 



Arrears Settlement 



To Pay 



Beatty, Sam 31-32 W. Walnut 8,25 

Brown, F.E. Pt.8 E.Huront. 275.00 

o'woodMill Co.8-10 W.Walnut 775.17 

Conn, Jno. Pt.12 E.Ste.Marie375.31 

Connolly, E.L. Pt.18 E.Huront. 840.95 

Pt .49-50 W.Pine 323.18 



Deacon, D.O. 
Debets, A.O. 

Faith, Max 
Fun 8 tin, Annie 



Business Tax 226.07 

3-7,10-11 Front 42.55 

3-5 E. Second 7.43 

Business Tax 42.98 

Pt.20 W.Biich 36.90 



Calloway, Sam Pt. 71-72 W.Huront.55.00 
Gibson, Mrs.J. Pt." G "W.Minnesot. 24.75 
Harrison, B. 35 B. Pine 86.38 

Hogg, Mrs.Wm. 16 W. Hickory 114.46 
Ke lis, Isabella Pt.39 W. Maple 98.18 



Latimer, Geo. 6 E.Hurontario 
Lawrence, H. 38 W. Oak 
Malcolm, F. 85 S. Ontario 



McCoy, C.C. 
McMinn, J. 

O'BrienjR.R. 

Raymond, R. 
Robinson, L.L. 
Rolling, M. 
Sheffield, A. 
Stantenburg, 
J.C. 
Thomas, Mr s.J. 
Tom, C.W. 



Vanci8e,J.H. 

Rolland, Mrs. 
Montgomery, G. 
Clark, W.A. 



9-10 E. Walnut 
"D.E.F." W. 

Huront. 
Pt.9 E.Ruront. 

Business Tax 
1-2 S. Rodney 
Pt. 47 Con. 11 
32-33 N.Seventh 

Business Tax 
21 E. Ste .Marie 
Pt.39 W.Huront. 
Pt.44 W.Huront. 
Pt.44 W.Huront. 
Pt. 31-32 E.Pine 

Ninth & Cameron 
2 W. Ste. Marie 
Maple 

Minnesota ' 
Rodney 



140.16 
196.80 
177.30 

239.47 

219.28 
911.39 

40.05 

406.10 

49.50 

22.05 

102.85 
97.55 

442.30 

449.53 
99.79 

702.46 

201.92 
271.71 



Mch. 10/36 in full 6.50 

$200. by July /36 240.00 

$50. per month 250.00 

$10. per month 290.00 
$25. 1st 2 months 

$100. next 5 months 606.00 
$56. Relief Credits 

for 4 months 

$1.25 each week 38.45 

$10. per month 34.45 

Mch. 15/36 in full 30.00 

Cash $13., balance 

in March & April 25.00 

in 3 insts. by Aug. 45.00 

#5. per month 20.00 

May 1/36 in full 70.00 

$5.00 monthly 90.00 

In full with 1936 

taxes by Dec. 1936 50.00 

$5. per month 100.00 

By Nov. in 3 inst. 140.00 

In full by June 

1/36 150.00 

$50. per month 200.00 

$5. per month 196.00 
In full by Apl. 

15/36 600.00 

$2. per month 33.80 

$10. per month 350,00 

Payment Mar.l/36 40.00 

Aug. 10/36 in full 20.00 

By Feb. 1936 in full 30.00 

85.50 



$5. per month 

$50. during March 

By July 1/36 to pay 

$500. 

In full by Dec. 

15/36 

$10. per month 

$10. per month 



796.42 $20. per month 



750.00 

350.00 
175.00 
150.00 

540.00 



Rebate 

1.75 

35.00 

325.17 

85.31 

558.13 



187.62 

15.53 
12.98 

11.90 
10.00 
4.75 
10.38 
24.46 

48.18 
40.16 
56.80 

27.50 
39.47 

23.28 

311.39 

6.25 

56.10 

9.50 

2.05 

72.85 
12.05 



241.62 

352.46 

26.92 

121.71 

256.42 



$ 3,193.49 






-11- 



Part Two 



REBATES SUBJECT TO OWNERS FULFILLING CONDITIONS OF SETTLEMENT 



Name & Property 

Burt, ll.J. 

10 W. Market 

Finlay, H.G. 

Pt. 39-40 E. Beech 
Business Tax 

Harrison, Bertha 
35. E. Pine 

Herron H. 

Pt.lOW.Huron- 
tario 

MacMurchy, R. 

33-35 E.Hickory 

McArthur, D. 

19-20 E.Hickory 

Peterman, J.C. 

H-15 E. Birch 
Pts. 19-20 W. Beech 

Schell, W.J. 

15-16 W. Spruce 

Shipley, Jno. 

Pt. 29 E. Beech 

Sherwood, J.H. 
30 S. Sixth 
28-30 W. Seventh 

Tinegate, Mrs. H. 
13 E. Pine 

Wright, Geo. 

25 W. Cedar 
25 E. Walnut 

Young, Mrs. Geo. 
39 W. Cedar 

Irwin, P. 

Pt. 8 E. St. Paul 

McCoy, C.C. 

9-10 E. Walnut 



Leggatt, S.W. 

Pt.9W. Wellington 



Dyer, J.H. 

Pt. 49 W. Birch 



Arrears Settlement 
199.75 $5.00 monthly 



153.79 By May 5/36 



68.84 By May l/36 



447.66 By June 8/36 



173.79 By May 30/36 



To PaY 
$183.48 



277.45 $25.00 monthly $190.61 



81,58 $5.00 monthly $ 70.00 



$ 95.63 



242.19 $5.00 monthly #200.00 



315.23 $15.00 monthly $265.00 



371.81 $50.00 monthly $250.00 



$ 53.00 



$300.00 



35.68 By June 15/36 $ 25.00 



247.11 $10.00 monthly $232.56 



$135.00 



182.65 $10.00 monthly $169.34 



216.21 In a few weeks $ 78.50 



An extent ion of one month on the 
arrangement granted by the Court 
of Revision on Feb. 27th, 1936. 



28.87 This amount should have been 
included with the agreement rati- 
fied by the Court of Revision on 
Feb. 27th, 1936 (See Minutes) 



82.49 By May 10/36 



$ 75.00 



£gb£te 
16.27 



86.94 
11.38 

38.16 

42.19 
50.23 

121.81 

13.84 

147.66 

8.68 
14.55 

38.79 
13.31 

137.71 



28.87 

— 12*42 

$782.78 



-12- 



PART TWO 



CASH SETTLEMENTS 



Name 


Property 


Paid 


Clark, W.A. 


7 S. Minnesota 


50.00 


Morris, H. 


43 W. Walnut 


16.00 


Bishop, Flora 


Pt. 9-10 B. Napier 


3.00 


Foreman, W. 


50-51 W. Ste. Marie 

i 


54.00) 
31.92) 


Speer, Verna 


Pt. 2 W. St. Paul 


45.00 


Smith, A. 


14-16 S. Seventh 


50.00 


Kenwell, W. 


1-5 E. Wellington 
31-32 E. Wellington 


51.25 


Walker, Mrs. 


53 E. Ste. Marie 


49.00 


Mc Arthur, D. 


3-4- W. Sixth ) 
Pt. 50 W. Birch) 


200.00 


Prentice, H.E. 


29 W. Maple 


175.00 


Fryer, W. 


Pt. 38 W. Birch 


60.00 


Davidson, W. 


49 B. Cedar 


65.00 


Menzies, H. 


26 S. Peel 


15.00 


Patterson, W.B. 


16 E. Fifth 


70.00 


Trott, H. 


Pt. 36-37 E. Maple 


50.00 


Creigg, L. 


37 W. Cedar 


20.00 


Cooper, 3. 


Pt. 29-30 W. Hickory 


17.35 


Cox, H. 


41-42 W. Hickory 
41-42 E. Spruce 


150.00 


Knuff, G. 


Pt. 48 E. Beech 


10.00 


McLean, G.E. 


Pt. 2 E. Hurontario 


150.00 


Parrott, W. 


4 N. Third 
45-46 E. Beech 


275.00 


Lindsay, S. 


Toronto St. ) 





Rebate 



Lyndon, Iva 

W. Cooper 
Leggatt, L. 
Woolner, Geo* 
Hunter, Geo. 
Ward, Mrs. J. 

Armitage, J. 

Johnson, Mrs. C. 
Brown, Alex 

Bryan, F.W. 



3-5 S. Ninth ) 
5 N. First ) 

Pt. 1 W. Elm ) 

1 Pt. 2 E. Elm) 

#3 W. Robinson 

38 S. Ontario 

Pt. 19 S. Ste. Marie 

8 W. Spruce 

53-54 W. Ste. Marie 

Pt. 50 E. Ste. Marie 

67-68 N. St. Vincent 
Pt. 41 E. Birch 

"E tt W. Minnesota 
41-45 N. Thomas 



75.00 



50.00 
33.00 
4.70 
25.00 
12.70 
19.00 

9.00 

10.00 
31.00 

15.00 



7.00 




3.00 




3.76 


P 


5.40) 
19.60) 


P 
P 


7.25 




15.25 




1.00 


P 


17.00 




11.95 
7.40 


P 



24.38 



17.42) 
19.88) 


P 


16.13 




4.00 




12.23 




84.37 




2.00 


P 


1.26) 
2.21) 


P 


28.00) 
73.39) 


P 



13.38 

24.61) P 
55.46) 

2.80) P 
129.75) 

11.34) P 
47.65) 



2.56) P 
22.36) 
11.00 P 
.47 P 
3.20 P 
3.00 P 
6.10) P 
4.00) 
1.10) P 
2.00) 

.90 P 
3.10 P 

1.96) P 
__ 8.53) 
?~ 739.14 







-13- 








PART 


THREE 


Rebates Granted February Ath, 1937 

Paid 


Rebate 








25 


Miller J. 


Pt. 5 E. Balsam 


83.80 


23.85 




26 


Dougherty, J, 


Pt. 5-6 Balsam 


39.18 
166.50. 


.02 




38 


Baker Est, 


Pt. 45 Cone. 10 


.01 




53 


Smith, Mrs. E. 


17 E. Beech 


224.45 


110.57 




57 


Barr, L. 


23 E. Beech 


73.27 


9.04 




66 


Shipley, Helen 


Pts. 31-52 E. Beech 


250.00 


204.26 




72 


Lawrence, Bella 


Pts. 39-40 E. Beech 


45.00 


54.23 




128 


Pleasance, Q. 


46 W. Beech 


50.00 


9.00 




147 


Bull, R. 


Pt. 11 E. Birch 


137.82 


22.30 




157 


McFaul, A. 


39 E. Birch 


100,00 


116.16 


V 


171 


Hill, Mand 


51 E. Birch 


90.10 


4.60 




186 


Conn, Jno. 


71-72 E. Birch 


20.00 


27.70 


V 


188 


Townes, Mary 


Pt. 6-7 W. Birch 


24.50 


.85 


P. 


195 


Park, Alex 


14 W, Birch 


34.00 


3.40 


P 


201 


Funstin, Annie 


Pt. 20 W. Birch 


55.65 


.01 




209 


Hogg, K.M. 


Pts. 31-52 W. Birch 


328.80 


59.20 




2U 


Lockton, Marie 


Pts. 35-36 W. Birch 


75.00 


82.10 




216 


Fryer, Est, 


Pt. 37 W. Birch ) 








217 


Fryer, Est, 


Pt. 37-58 W. Birch ) 


449.53 


296.74 




218 


Fryer, Est, 


Pt. 38 W. Birch 








286 


Byrnes, Mary 


27 E. Cedar 


200.00 


52.07 




301 


Cook, Hugh 


48 E. Cedar 


56.40 


5.60 


P 


354 


Allan, Ruby 


Pt. 2 S. Collins 


22.20 


16.53 




302 


Rice, E. 


11-20 N. Windham 


15.50 


3.42 




427 


Campbell Est, 


38 E. Elgin 


56.25 


5.50 




428 


C, B. Jones 


Pt. 37 E. Elgin 


75.00 


54.54 




502 


Kennedy, R, 


37-58 S. Fifth 


50.00 


9.69 




510 


Condy, I, 


6 S. First 


15.00 


45.12 


V 


526 


Gillson, C. 


Pt, 1-3 W, Fourth 


36.00 


5.00 


P 


538 


Durnford, A. 


16 N. Hamilton 


28.00 


2.80 


P 


569 


El don Reps. 


12-1 5W. Hickory 


20.00 


78.30 


V 


570 


Allan, Ruby 


16 W. Hickory 


84.15 


52.71 




575 


Currie, Isabel 


Pts. 19-20 W. Hickory 


30.00 


44.96 




576 


Homley, F, 


1 W. Hickory 


8.40 


.15 


P 


578 


Pomphery, Chas, 


25 W. Hickory 


29.38 


27.00 




586 


Hunt, Geo, 


55-34 W. Hickory 


26.00 


25.00 




619 


Public Utilities 


Pt. 5 E. Hurontario 




75.92 


Bus 










Tax Out of 


625 


Brown, Esther 


Pt. 8 E. Hurontario 


155.00 


109.85 




647 


Bellman Est, 


Pts. 21-22 E, Hurontario 




30.80 




650 


Wilson, Jno. 


Pts. 25-24 E. Hurontario 


266.38 


275.22 




651 


Criesbach, J, 


Pt. 24 E, Hurontario 


133.62 


537.68 




687 


Culbronson ^ 0. 


Pt. n B n E. Hurontario 


100.00 


26.50 




688 


Carmichael, A, 


Pt. "B" E. Hurontario 


51.00 


5.10 


P 


710 


Hogg, W.A. 


Pt. 18 W. Hurontario 


207.20 


92.70 




805 


Haggins, Bert 


Pt. 19 E. Maple 


37.50 


3.75 


P 


8 15 


McPaul, A.M. 


34-Pt, 35 E. Maple 


259.60 


519.29 




817 


Trott, H. 


Pt. 36,37-39 E. Maple 


65.00 


65.48 


V 


820 


McLean, H. 


43 E. Maple 


209.88 


9.97 


P 


839 


?/alton, J, 


Pt, 14 W. Maple 


72.77 


9.73 




842 


Watts, Mira 


Pt. 14 W, Maple 


35.00 


33.24 


V 


866 


McCormack, J.J, 


Pt. 41-42 W. Maple 


253.30 


113.78 




867 


Storey, Zoe 


Pt. 41 W. Maple 


113.82 


55.00 




878 


Davenport, W, 


51-53 W. Maple 


7.00 


.70 


P 


911 


Yeadell, W, 


Pt. 13-14 E, Market 


66.21 


3.99 


P 


919 


Brock, C. 


Pt. M C M W. Minnesota 


20.00 


2.00 




921 


Mathie, Bessie 


Pt. "D" W. Minnesota 


35.00 


15.00 




943 


McLaughlan, A, 


Pts. 29-30 E. Minnesota 


2.00 


2.13 


V 


949 


Brock, F, 


Pt. "F" E. Minnesota 


5.00 


6.00 


V 


950 


Brock B. 


Pt, n F" E. Minnesota 


5.00 


6.00 


V 


967 


Saunders H, 


16 W, Minto 


30.00 


11.68 


V 


1000 


Prentice, Reps. 


4-5 W. Hapier 


17.50 


17.70 


V 


1038 


Barfoot, Jessie 


"L" W. Niagara 


92.00 


22.34 




1062 


Hurst, Hugh 


12-15 S. Ninth 


15.00 


5.55 


P 



- ■ 



Part Three (Con't) 



- 14 - 



Paid 



Rebate 



1074 Buie, Angus 

1089 Sammons, J, 

1090 Lyons, L. 
1092 Cooper, Jean 
1098 Young, T. 
1101 Draper, E. 
1146 Barfoot, Edith 
1180 Leggatt, Lyle 
1390 Leggatt, Lyle 
1190 Pleasance, C. 
1213 Parrish, Geo, 
1227 Hanley, Wm. 
1251 Faith, Max 

1277 Storey, fl. 

1278 Storey, H. 
1290 Dougherty, Miss 
1305 Hughes, Est. 
1361 McCabe, T. 
1373 Woolner, Sarah 
1417 Haney, Jane 
1425 Allan, Ruby 
1450 Owens, W.A. 
1472 Phillips Est. 
1484 Williams, D. 
1516 Brown, Esther 
1577 Draper, Art 
1583 Woolner, Geo. 
1635 Perry, Ben 
I646 Mitchell, C. 
1661 Johnson, Mrs. 
1673 Bull, Agnes 
1685 Sheffield, N. 
1712 Kennedy, Geo. 
1721 Stephens, C. 
1745 Stalker, Ann 
1806 Hunter, Geo. 
1834A White, Fred 
1907 Bailey, Sam 
1949 Russ, Sam 
1979 Laserou, P. 
1987 Mason, Mona 
1992 Morrill, A. 
2009 Watt, Wm. 
2020 Pryde, Jas. 



Pt. 19-20 E. Oak 


40.00 


5.25 




44 E. Oak 


31.40 


5.69 




45 E. Oak 


34.06 


3.40 


P 


48-49 E. Oak 


10.00 


22.00 


V 


13. W. Oak 


10.90 


4.95 




16-17 W. Oak 


200.00 


55.40 




19 N. Ontario 


38.00 


7.00 




38 S. Ontario ) 




4.95 




36-37 E. Wellington ) 


50.00 


13.38 




Pt. 8 W. Patterson 


40.00 


4.60 


P 


46 W. Peel 


93.00 


42.60 




43 E, Pell 




1.00 


P 


Pt. 16 E. Pine 


Lane 


61.73 


V 


Pt. 39-40 E. Pine (To 


pay all 


172.05 




Pt. 39-40 E. Pine 


others) 


305.46 




50 W. Pine 


750.00 


945.23 




23 W. Pine 


65.00 


21.88 




Pts. 1-2 W. Robinson 


16.50 


3.02 


P 


Pt. 10 W. Robinson 


53.00 


54.25 




23 E. Robinson 


10.00 


4.00 


P 


Pts. 19-20 W. Rodney 


69.33 


1.76 


P 


18 S. Rodney 


14.46 


2.30 


P 


51 W. Ste. Marie 


178.76 


5.00 




Pt. 44-45 W. Ste. Marie 


75.00 


84.15 




21 W. Ste. Marie 


288.00 


126.81 




11 E. Ste. Marie 


84.87 


2.43 


P 


Pt. 19 E. Sts. Marie 


41.29 


2.41 


P 


Pts. 6-7 E. St. Paul 


14.00 


1.40 


P 


Pt. 14 E. St. Paul 


158.07 


55.73 




67-63 W. St. Vincent 


15.00 


.94 


P 


7-3 S. Second 


25.00 


35.70 


V 


19 N. Seventh 


50.00 


4.29 


p 


25-26 N. Siacoe 


174.00 


43.68 




30-32 S. Siacoe 


15.00 


36, /a 


V 


Pt. 26 N. Sixth 


23.50 


2.35 


p 


8 W. Spruce 


18.85 


3.85 


p 


7-3 N. Third 




61.10 




Business 


5.00 


7.85 




Business 


59.15 


324.33 




Business 


85.00 


48.03 




Business 


5.00 


4.90 




Business 


10.00 


19.82 




Business 


3.00 


2.50 




Business 


24.00 


15.31 








$6.474.20 



-15- 



"B" 



EXPENDITURES MADE OR LIABILITIES INCURRED WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTY NOW OR 
FORME^Y BELONGING TO THE ESTATE OF W. A. TOM, ON THE WEST SIDE OF 
HURONTARIO STREET, IN THE SAID TOWN, DURING THE 
YEAR 1956. 



This property is described as follows: The North half of lot Thirty- 
nine (39), on the West side of Hurontario Street, as shown on Registered Plan 
No. 75, and more particularly described in Registration No, 8125, in the Re- 
gistry Office for the County of Simcoe, at Barrie. 

It comprises a two-storey brick building, which is quite old and 
which was at one time used as a livery stable. Latterly it was used as a taxi 
office and a public garage for minor repairs and storage of automobiles. It 
was originally owned by W. A. Tom, He died on January 23rd, 1936, leaving a 
will dated July 10th, 1935, in which he named his son, William Garfield Tom 
and one Hugh A, Currie, Trustees of his estate. By his will he gave and de- 
vised all his estate to his trustees subject to the following trusts, viz: 

(1) To pay his debts; 

(2) That his widow, Mart ilia Tom, shall have a life estate 
in all his property; and 

(3) That on her death, his son William Garfield Tom, shall 
have the remainder. 

otters Probate were granted to the trustees on August 7th, 1936, 

At the time of his death, this property was assessed to him and there 
were arrears of taxes unpaid as follows: 

1933 Taxes $ 120,33 
Penalty 12.03 

1934 Taxes HO. 79 
Penalty 14-. OS 

1935 Taxes 155.10 

$ 442.30 
When 1936 Taxes 165.68 are added, 

Total taxes amount to & 605.98 

The estate had no cash and the only other asset was the deceased* s 

house, which was also subjec t to substantial tax arrears and subject, too, to a 

mortgage. The total estate was valued by the trustees on the application for 

probate, as follows: 

The garage property, - $ 2,500.00 
Deceased 1 s residence,- 1,200.00 

Total,- $ 5.700.00 



- 16 - 



At the date of W. A. Thorn 1 s death, about one-half of the garage was 
occupied by a tenant (Pryde) who was paying $10.00 a month. This was reduced 
to $5.00 a month in June, 1936. The balance of the building was occupied by 
the son, William Garfield Tom, who was not paying any rent. 

Following the granting of Letters Probate, nothing further was done 
by the trustee. The son remained in possession of the portion of the building 
which he had been occupying, as did also the tenant, Pryde. Commencing with 
July, Pryde paid his monthly rent to the town treasurer and it was credited 
against the taxes. 

During the summer, the tax collector had several discussions with 
Gary Tom about the tax arrears and Cary indicated that he was hopeful that he 
could arrange a mortgage loan on the property sufficient to pay the arrears of 
taxes. By September he had been unable to make tuch a loan and stated to the 
collector that he had decided to "let it go for taxes". That same month, he 
moved from Collingwood to Myrtle, Ontario. 

In October, 1936, the widow, Martilla Tom, executed a document des- 
cribed as a "Quit Claim Deed" releasing all her interest in the garage property 
to the Town of Collingwood. This document is the standard form of Quit Claim. 
It was prepared in the office of the town Clerk, but was not executed un der 
seal.. 

In early November, the tenant, Pryde, vacated the property as a re- 
sult of notice from the town and on November 9th, the town began to alter the 
interior and to repair the roof of the building and completed this work in 
about two weeks. The cost of these repairs amounted to $681.4-0, made up as 
follows: 

Material - $322.60 

Skilled labour,- 158.70 
Relief labour,- 200.10 

Total,- $681.4.0 

Having completed the repairs and alterations, the town foreman, on instructions 

from the Mayor, placed a si^n on the property which stated that it would be 

occupied by the Sobie Silk Company, early in 1937. 

In the Fall of the year, the trustee Currie took ill and when he re- 
covered and was able to go about town, he discovered that all these repairs 



-17- 



and alterations had "been completed. He did not then, nor has he at any time 
made any objection to any town official. Early in January, 1937, he placed a 
"For Sale" sign on the property and the town foreman removed it on instructions 
from Mayor Kohl and placed a notice in the window of the building that no 
signs should be put on the building without the town's permission. 

On or about January 22nd, 1937, the tax collector and Councillor 
Boyle went to Myrtle and there William Garfield Tom and his wife executed a 
"Quit Claim Deed" to the town of Collingwood, releasing all their title to this 
property. This document had been prepared in the town Clerk's office and it 
too is not under seal. At the same time, they also signed another document 
not under seal in which they purported to convey all their title to this pro- 
perty to the municipality and this document states that the consideration 
therefor is that "the claim of $605.98 for tax arrears and the sum of #681,30 
for repairs made to the building by the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood 
shall be cancelled by the Corporation of the Town of Collingwood", 

During this inquiry, considerable evidence was given as to the 
circumstances under which Martilla Tom signed the so-called "Quit Claim Deed* and 
the suggestion was made that an unfair advantage was taken of the old lady 
(she is 84 year 8 of age) and that she might not have fully realized what she 
was doing, I entirely exonerate the tax collector, the Mayor and any other 
persons who had anything to do with obtaining her signature to this document 
from any bad faith, over-reaching, duress, misrepresentation or undue influence, 
Mrs, Tom, though very old, is remarkably mentally bright and active and I find 
as a fact that she fully appreciated the full meaning and intended affect of 
the document which she signed. In fact, at the inquiry, she made no complaint 
and very definitely confirmed by her evidence her intention that she should re- 
lease to the town all her claims on the property. 

There was also a similar suggestion as to Garfield Tom and his wife, 
but there was no evidence justifying any suspicion that they were not fully 
aware of the intended affect of the documents and I find that they thoroughly 
understood and fully intended, by signing these documents, to surrender their 
interest in this property to the municipality. 

In connection with the circumstances of the signing of these docu- 
ments by both the widow and the son and his wife, reference was made to the 



-18- 



considerable difference "between the amount of taxes owing, vi»: $605.98, and 
the assessed value of the property, Viz: $3720.00. A comparison of these fig- 
ures might lead to the conclusion that the estate had a substantial equity in 
the property. The great preponderance of evidence is that in the Town of 
Collingwood the assessed value has absolutely no relation to the market value 
or the selling value. Due to local conditions, principally the closing down of 
industries which at one time were alive and flourishing, values have "been very 
greatly depressed. The town assessor stated that he did not know of any sale 
of real estate in the last four years, apart from distress sales. One witness, 
when pressed to co-relate assessed values to market values, states that present 
market values would "be about one-fifth of assessed values. The former tenant 
of the property, Pryde, was willing to pay only #400.00 for the property and 
that was conditional upon the roof "being repaired. Having regard to all the 
evidence, I find that the estate had no equity in the property over and ahove 
the unpaid taxes. Further, that the estate was unable to make the much needed 
repairs or to pay the tax arrears and unless a miracle should happen, it would 
lose the property at least in another year through tax sale and in the inter- 
val, due to its very "bad state of repair, it would further seriously depreciate 
in value. 

Under all the circumstances, I find that what the municipality 
attempted to do was felt "by the council to "be practical. However, it failed in 
its intention, "because - 

1. The "Quit Claims" are not under seal and, therefore, the interests 
of Mart ilia Tom and William Garfield Tom and his wife have not 
"been conveyed to the municipality; 

2. The title or fee is vested in the trustees of W.A. Tom's estate. 

Apart from the foregoing, I find that the municipality had no legal 
power to acquire this property in the manner in which it attempted to acquire 
it. Certainly it had no legal right or power to spend money in altering or 
repairing property which it did not own. 

There is no "by-law authorizing the acquisition "by the town of this 
property, or the spending of any money upon it. Neither was there any sum pro- 
vided in the estimates for this work. 

All that appears in the Minutes of the council meeting concerning 
this property is a resolution passed unanimously at a special meeting on Octo- 



-19- 



"ber 27th, 1936, "that the municipality accept a Quit Claim D eed from Mrs. Tom 
and that the matter he referred to the finance committee and a solici- 
tor to check the legality of the transaction". The widow had, in fact, pre- 
viously signed the Quit Claim and it had "been delivered to the Mayor. However, 
I find that at some meeting of the council, prohahly the meeting held on 
Noveraher 9th, a resolution was unanimously passed authorizing the Board of 
Works of the town to proceed to make the necessary repairs to the "building. No 
such resolution is recorded in the Minutes, hut the preponderance of evidence 
is that it was presented and passed and it is doubtless an oversight that it is 
not recorded in the Minutes. 



nnn 



EXPENDITURES MADE BY WAY OP DIRECT RELIEF SHELTER ALLOWANCE TO OCCUPANTS OF 
THE PROPERTY NOW OR FORMERLY BELONGING TO S.C. COOPER, ON THE 
EAST SIDE OF HTJRONTARIO STREET, IN THE SAID 
TOWN DURING THE YEAR 1936. 



This property is described as the Northerly Thirty-five (35*) feet 

of Lot Numher Five (5), on the East side of Hurontario Street, according to 

Registered Plan Numher 15989. It comprises two stores with two living apart- 
ments ahove. 

During my inquiry, considerahle evidence was given with reference to 
this property having to do not only with relief rent, hut also with an alleged 
claim against the municipality hy the owner and with the cancellation of taxes 
in settlement of this alleged claim. It is convenient to make a comprehensive 
report on all these matters under this heading. 

The property was formerly owned hy Mrs. Caroline Hodgson, One of the 
stores had "been occupied as a drug store hy a merchant named Griffith. He got 

into financial difficulties and made an assignment for the benefit of his credi- 
tors. At the date of the assignment, one Mrs. Johnston held a chattel mortgage 
on the stock of merchandise and, apparently, under some arrangement "between the 
trustee and Mrs. Johnston, she sold the merchandise to Seymour C. Cooper, in 
November 1927, for $4000.00, payahle $2000.00 cash and $2000.00 was secured hy 
a chattel mortgage given hy Cooper to her. Immediately thereafter he commenced 
"business in the premises. It did not appear in evidence whether or not Cooper 
ever paid off this chattel mortgage. 



- 20 - 



Then on July 6th, 1928, Cooper and his wife, as joint tenants, 
bought the freehold from Mrs. Hodgeon and obtained a deed. The consideration 
was said to be $4500.00, but part or all of this was paid by the purchaser 
conveying other property to the vendor by way of exchange. It is, therefore, 
impossible to determine what cash value was at that time placed on the property 
either by the vendor or purchaser. 

On May 1st, 1929, Cooper and his wife borrowed from Norman E. 
Rippert, who afterwards, viz: in the years 1935 and 1936, was a member of the 
town council, the sum of $3000.00, and gave Ruppert a mortgage on this pro- 
perty and on their residence in the Town of Collingwood. The whole of this mort- 
gage and about two years arrears of interest still remains unpaid. 

From the very beginning, Cooper began to lose money and taxes began 
to fall in arrear at least as early as 1929. As indicative of his financial 
predicemant, it was disclosed in evidence that he allowed taxes to fall in ar- 
rear on his home and it was sold at a tax sale and not redeemed. It is signi- 
ficant, in view of later developments, that the inventory value of the mer- 
chandise at cost price for which he paid $4,500.00 was at the date of the pur- 
chase, roughly $11,000.00} in or about April, 1933, the inventory taken in the 
same manner had shrunk to $8,000.00 or $9,000.00, and in May, 1935, it had 
furth.r shrunk to $5,327.94. A large part of his business consisted of the 
manufacture and sale of household remedies and veterinary supplies known as the 
"Johnston Remedies". It is significant that the volume of this business de- 
creased from about $4,500.00 in 1928 to about $2,500.00 in 1929 and to about 
$1,500.00 in 1930. He stated that from 1930 to 1935, it remained fairly con- 
stant at about $1,500.00 yearly. His gross profit from this branch of his 
business was about 60$ of the sale price. 

In 1933, the then tax collector, J.H. Duncan, distrained on the stock 
of merchandise for arrears of taxes amounting to $1,529.21. Mr. Duncan died 
soon after this distraint and during my inquiry, it was stated that all the re- 
cords in connection with this distraint had been lost. He was succeeded by one 
G. B. Westcott. Mr. Westcott has since died and some original documents relat- 
ing to events subsequent to the distraint which were signed by Cooper and 
Westcott have also been lost. However, Mr. Fair, the tovm solicitor, obtained 
from Mr. Westcott f s home, recently, a file containing some original records and 



-21- 



also what appeared to "be copies of originals. Among these apparent copies was 
a carbon copy of an agreement dated October 30th, 1933, the original of which 
had, apparently, been signed by Cooper and Westcott and witnessed by John L. 
Smart, Chairman of the Finance Committee of the town Council* I admitted this 
copy in evidence, although it was not strictly proved. Cooper stated in evi- 
dence that he had signed a document which contained at least some of the pro- 
visions set out in this copy and would not deny that this copy was a true copy 
of the original, Mr. Smart could not state positively that it was a true copy, 
but he too recalled that the original contained at least some of the provisions 
set out in this copy. I feel that it is reasonable to hold that this copy is 
a true copy of the original. This agreement is as follows: 

"It Seymour C. Cooper, Druggist, of the Town of Collingwood in the 
County of Simcoe, HEREBY ACKNOWLEDGE that I owe the Municipal Corpora- 
tion of the Town of Collingwood, the sum of $1,807.81, for arrears of 
taxes due by me and charged against my brick block and premises situated 
on the East side of Hurontario Street, and being composed of the 
N. part of lot Number 5 on the said East side of Hurontario Street. 

"AND I agree to pay, weekly, $4.00, on account of such taxes, 
and such further sum as I shall be able to pay; the same to be paid 
to C.B. Westcott, Town Collector, such payment to be applied upon 
said arrears of taxes and costs incurred in connection with the dis- 
tress therefor. 

"In consideration of this Agreement and in consideration of the 
said weekly payments, the said C.B. Westcott hereby agrees with me, 
subject to the approval of the Finance Committee of the Town, to ex- 
tend the "time for payment of the said arrears of taxes and with that 
in view, to adjourn the sale of the stock of chattels, drugs and 
effects now under distress by his Bailiff. 

"AND further, in consideration of this Agreement and the said 
payments, I, the said Seymour C. Cooper do hereby request the said 
C.B. Westcott to extend the time for payment of the said arrears of 
taxes, from time to time, insofar as he can lawfully do so, and also 
extend the time for sale of said chattels, under the present dis- 
tress for taxes, made as aforesaid. 

"AND it is further understood and agreed that S.C. Cooper, 
Druggist, may be appointed by the said C.B. Westcott, as his Clerk 
or Bailiff, to have charge and custody of said Chattels, drugs and 
effects, as shown by the Inventory hereto attached, and to make re- 
port to C.B. Westcott from time to time. 

"AND further, in consideration of this Agreement, I agree to 
and do hereby waive any right I now have or may hereafter have 
against the said C.B. Westcott, Town Collector, or against the said 
Municipal Corporation, for failure to sell and dispose of said 
chattels, drugs and effects, so distrained, as aforesaid, for ar- 
rears of taxes or for any extension for payment of the said arrears 
of taxes or any adjournment or adjournments made by the said bail- 
iff, of the sale of the said chattels, drugs and effects, under 
said distress. 

"AND this Waiver shall apply to any steps that have been 



- 22 - 



"taken by the said Collector, to collect the said arrears of taxes, 
both before and after the making of this Agreement. 

"DATED at Collingwood the 30th day of October, 1933. 



Vnitness: 



( Sgd) S. C. Cooper 
DEBTOR 

( Sgd) G. B. Westcott 
10m COLLECTOR 

Approved of by the Finance Committee. 

(Sgd) John L. Smart 

Chairman, Finance Committee " 

Although this Agreement is dated October 30th, 1933, it is a fair in- 
ference that there had previously been some verbal arrangement between Cooper 
and the collector, probably J. H. Duncan, because commencing with July l/,.th, 
1933, payments were made on account of tax arrears and these payments were 
continued up to October 17th, 19 34-. They are described as" cash receipts" and 
are as follows: 



$ 2.00 
2.00 
2.00 
2.00 
4.00 
2.00 
2.00 
6.00 
2.00 
11.00 

4.00 

2.70 

11.69 

ll.*0 

15.03 

15.00 

13.70 

7.21 

6.77 

7.17 

6*1? 



July 


H 


Cash 


Receipt 


n 


20 


n 


11 


n 


28 


M 


it 


Aug. 


8 


H 


n 


it 


18 


n 


n 


tt 


31 


11 


11 


n 


27 


it 


n 


Sept. 


30 


11 


n 


Oct. 


6 


it 


n 


n 


20 


n 


11 


Nov. 


17 


it 


n 


Dec. 


U-i 


11 


it 


1234 








Feb. 


15 


n 


n 


Mar. 


17 


n 


n 


Apr. 


13 


11 


n 


May 22 


n 


it 


June 


18 


it 


n 


July 


13 


11 


11 


Aug. 


15 


it 


n 


Sept. 


17 


n 


it 


Oct. 


17 


it 


11 



Total,- 



I 155.82 



No payment svcwere made after October 17th, 1934. By that time, the total un- 
paid taxes had increased by the addition of the 1933 taxes and penalty to 
,826.24. 



On October 22nd, 1934, the mortgagee of the freehold, Ruppert, wrote 
a letter, which was afterwards found in Mr. Westcott 1 s file, to the chairman of 
the finance committee in which he offered to pay Cooper's taxes in full "less 



-23- 



penalties". Apparently, no action was taken "by the Council, nor does it ap- 
pear that the letter ever came to the attention of the council. Ruppert then 
wrote another letter to the chairman of the finance committee on November 31st, 
1934, repeating this offer and also complaining that the town was collecting 
the rent from one of the tenants in the "building. There were no developments 
as a result of that letter. 

Then Mr. Ruppert was elected Deputy Reeve at the annual elections in 
January, 1935. 

On or about April 30th, 1935, Ruppert consulted his solicitors, 
Messrs. Boys and Boys, and these solicitors wrote a letter to the Clerk of the 
town complaining, among other matters, ahout the delay in realizing from the 
sale of the stock of merchandise which was under seizure. I quote the rele- 
vant part of this letter: 

"Mr. Ruppert feels that he has been seriously prejudiced "by 
the town's action in seizing and then not proceeding with the sale, 
because if the sale had "been proceeded with at the time the seiz- 
ure was made, there is no doubt that the full amount of the taxes 
could have been realized without any difficulty. The delay, how- 
ever, has resulted in the stock being depleted and becoming ob- 
solete and it is doubtful now if the taxes can be realized in full 
if the sale is proceeded with. 

"We are writing this letter to request that you proceed with 
the sale at once and realize as much as possible and having done 
so, Mr. Ruppert can then decide whether he will take any further 
action or not " 

On May 13th, 1935, no doubt as a result of this letter, the tax 
collector, C. B. Westcott, attended at Cooper's store and took possession. He 
was accompanied by Councillor J. H. Irwin, who was chairman of the finance 
committee. Cooper surrendered the keys to Westcott and left the store and 
some time later, left town to live in Toronto. 

The collector then employed two men to inventory the merchandise. On 
the basis of the original cost price, the merchandise was valued at #5,327.94, 
and the equipment was also valued at $375.55. One of the men who inventoried 
the stock was a drug clerk of thirteen years 1 experience. He gave evidence 
before me and explained that, while he had extended the prices in his inventory 
using a drug and drug sundry catalogue as a guide, there was a large part of 
the stock very old and shop-worn and obsolete. Some of it showed that it had 
been in stock since at least the year 1909. Much of it he considered unsaleable 
at any price and, therefore, the total inventory price does not indicate even 



- 24 - 



appro imately the value of the stock. He gave it as his opinion that the 
value would not exceed $1000.00. I accept his evidence as to value. It would 
have been very much to Ruppert f s advantage if the stock and fixtures would 
have been sufficient to satisfy the arrears of taxes. He was alarmed as to 
his position as mortgagee of the land. It is corroborative of the valuators 
evidence, therefore, when we find Ruppert's solicitors in their letter dated 
April 30th, stating that the stock has been "depleted" and has become 
"Obsolete" and that it is "doubtful now if the taxes can be realized in full 
if the sale is proceeded with " and that the town should "proceed with the sale 
at once and realize as much as possible". 

Instead of proceeding in conformity with Section 114. of The Assess- 
ment Act, the town advertised the stock for sale by tender in two Toronto 
papers. There was, apparently, only one response and that came from Hamiltons 
DrugsLimited, which company operated a chain of drug stores in Hamilton. 
This firm, on examining the inventory and before seeing the merchandise, stated 
that "the stock as a whole is of little value to us", but that there were parts 
of it on which they would be willing to pay fifty cents on the flollar. 
Finally, a sale was made to this company of part of the drug stock for $181.97. 
The balance was sold in bulk to one H. Hoitman for $200.00; a cash register 
brought $45.00; and there wee two other small sales totalling $8.90, making 
in all $4-35.87. Cooper applied for his statutory exemption and accepted cer- 
tain equipment and $150.00 in cash. After deducting the expenses and Cooper's 
exemption, the net proceeds of the sale amounted to $230.81. 

On May 31st, 1935, Cooper wrote a letter to the Council requesting 
that the "seizure" be considered as paying all taxes" to December 31st, 1935. 
This letter was referred to the finance committee. Cooper and Ruppert then 
interviewed Mayor Davis who was chairman of the finance committee and Ruppert, 
notwithstanding the earlier letter from his solicitors, urged that the stock 
was more valuable than the amount of taxes and wanted the town to forego the 
taxes as against the land. Mayor Davis refused to accede to this request. 
There is no evidence that the matter was considered by the whole committee. 
Nothing further was done about the matter until Cooper wrote another letter to 
the council under date of April 5th, 1936, demanding a "settlement regarding 
the unlawful sale" of his drug stock. This letter was considered by the 



- 25 - 



correspondence coaimittee of the council, consisting of Messrs, Borland, Mit- 
chell and Ruppert and in its report to the council at a meeting held on April 
14th, 1936, this committee recommended that this letter be referred to the 
finance committee, - consisting of Mayor Kohl, Borland and Ruppert, with 
power to act. This report was adopted by the council. 

From that date, Ruppert swore that he took no part in the delibera- 
tions of the finance committee, so far as this matter was concerned and is 
corroborated in this by the evidence of the other two members of that co/nmit- 
tee, These other members consulted Messrs. Hoys and Boys/ to the liability 
of the municipality and were advised that Cooper had a claim and according to 
Borland 1 s evidence, "a very definite one". These two members of the committee 
then decided that the municipality should settle with Cooper. Mayor Kohl was 
in Toronto later and held a telephone conversation with Cooper and suggested 
settlement. No amount was discussed, Mayor Kohl stating that it would be left 
to the council. Cooper suggested that the council make him an offer. The 
matter did not again come before the council, but an agreement was prepared in 
the town clerk 1 s office between Cooper and the municipality, whereby the muni- 
cipality waived and cancelled all taxes against the land, amounting to 
$2319.90, to December 31st, 1935, and all business taxes to the same date 
amounting to $236.31. In consideration thereof, Cooper waived all claims 
against the municipality arising out of the proceedings that had bean taken to 
recover the tax arrears or th§ sale of the stock and chattels. This agreement 
was executed by the municipal corporation and forwarded to Cooper, in duplicate, 
who also signed it and returned one duplicate original to the municipality. 
No report was subsequently made by the finance committee to the council as to 
the settlement. 

I find that the whole matter was badly handled from the beginning to 
the end. The town solicitor was not consulted until it was too late. If 
Ruppert 1 s earlier offer to pay the taxes had been followed up, doubtless the 
municipality would have received its taxes without the necessity of aasale. I 
do not criticise the finance committee in its decision to settle after having 
received the legal opinion of Mr. Boys. I find, however, that the settlement 
was unreasonably extravagant. No by-law was passed authorizing the settlement. 
Ruppert, in view of his financial interest in the matter, must have applied 

most unusual restraint on his own conduot if he refrained fro, participating 



- 26 - 



in the deliberations of the finance committee in 1936, as he swears he did. 
Time must have considerably strengthened his moral courage, because in 1935, he 
very vigorously sought to obtain the same result to himself, as follows from 
the agreement which the finance committee made in 1936. Such moral courage 
would have been more appreciated by the ratepayers of the municipality of he 
had resigned from the council when a conflict between his own personal inter- 
ests and the interests of the municipality first became so apparent. Finally, 
in view of all the circumstances, the other two members of the finance com- 
mittee, even if they did not think a by-law was necessary, should at least 
have reported the proposed settlement to the whole council and asked approval 
of it. Even at this late date, the present council might very well consider 
fche advisability of repudiating the whole settlement and seeking a more reason- 
able adjustment of any claim which Cooper »ay have and look to the realty for 
the balance of the taxes. 

With reference to direct relief shelter allowances to occupants of 
the property, the evidence is that while Cooper was occuping the store, there 
were no relief tenants in the building. Subsequently, there were relief 
tenants in the apartments and the municipality paid the rental of $14.00 per 
month, applying it against the taxes. Ruppert was chairman of the relief com- 
mittee in 1936. However, he swore that he was not a mortgagee in possession 
from which it follows that Cooper was still the landlord. In any event, the 
rate of the relief rental allowed is not any greater than that allowed else- 
where in the town. 

nntt 



EXPENDITURES MADE IN CONNECTION wlTH THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF INDUSTRIES IN 

THE SAID TOW DURING THE YEAR 1956. 



There was included in the estimates adopted by the council at a meet- 
ing held on May 15th, 1936, the sum of #400.00 under the caption "Industries". 
During my inquiry, it was explained in evidence that this item had to do with 
expenses that might be incurred during the year in an effort to obtain in- 
dustries for the town during th t year. 

The industries committee for 1936 consisted of L.R, Borland (chair- 
man), W.J. Boyle and Mayor Kohl. 



- 27 - 



During the year, the following payments were made to members of the 

industries committee, on this account: - 

Item A Aug. 8 To Mayor Kohl $ 5.00 

Item B Aug. 14 To Mayor Kohl 50.00 

(These were approved by the industries committee 
in its report dated September 14th, which was 
submitted to and adopted by the council at its 
meeting held the same day) 

Item C Sept. 15 To Mayor Kohl 10.00 

" D Sept. 15 To Mayor Kohl 23.00 

" E Sept. 29 To L.R. Borland 120.00 

(These were approved by the industries committee 
in its report dated December 15th, which was 
submitted to and adopted by the council at its 
meeting held the same day) 

Item F Dec. 8 To L.R. Borland 87.00 

(This was approved by the industries committee 
in its report dated December 15th, which was 
submitted to and adopted by the council at its 
meeting jaeld the same day) 



Total,- 1295.00 | 295.00 

Item G In addition there was also paid on this 
account throughout the year to various 
persons or corporations, the further 
sum of,- 65. Ik 

T0TAL,- 



ITEM A - $5.00 

This payment covered a trip made by Mayor Kohl to Barj ie. The Mayor 
explained in evidence the purpose of this trip. It was, apparently, a proper 
expense under this heading. 

ITEM B - $50.00 

This payment covered a trip made by Mayor Kohl and Councillors 
Ruppert and Borland to Windsor, Ontario, in the latter part of August. They 
were away two days. Prior to that date, two Windsor men, Messrs. Rider and 
Ribbany, had interviewed Mayor Kohl and Councillor Borland in Collingwood, re- 
levent to the possibility of locating in Collingwood a steel industry which 
they, apparently, contemplated organizing. This trip to Windsor was the result 
of that earlier discussion in Collingwood. In Widdsor, this deputation met 
Messrs. Rider and Ribanny and discussed the proposal further. During my in- 
quiry, it was not suggested that the trip to Windsor was unwarranted. The only 
point that arose as the result of the evidence was whether the trip had cost 
$50.00. It has not heretofore been the practise for deputations such as this 



- 28 - 



to submit an itemized statement of its expenses. However, during my inquiry, 
Mayor Kohl volunteered to give me an itemised statement as nearly as he could 
trusting to his recollection. He, accordingly, filed a statement showing the 
total cost of the trip to have been $66.15* This statement included 3 return 
railway tickets at $H»05 each, a total of $42.15. Later in the inquiry, it 
developed that the deputation had not gone by railway, but had employed a local 
taxi driver, Van Koughnet, who drove the deputation to Windsor and return. He 
stated in evidence that his fee for a two day trip to Windsor would be about 
$40.00; that while in Windsor, the members of the deputation paid some of his 
expenses which would be deducted from his account. Mayor Kohl in his evidence 
did not say that he paid Van Koughnet for this trip. Neither did Van Koughnet 
say he received payment from Mayor Kohl. Van Koughnet had been engaged on 
various occasions to provide taxi service for the council and it was his cus- 
tom to render a statement of his account to the municipality at the end of each 
month. On September 1st, he rendered his account for the month of August 
amounting to $39.50, and was paid by cheque on the same day. Unfortunately, 
his statement could not be found during the inquiry. He was not certain whe- 
ther his account for that trip was included in his statement or not, but he 
felt reasonably sure that it was. The evidence is not very clear on the 
point. However, I find that in view of the Mayor's first statement that the 
deputation went by railway and that when recalled to the witness box, he did 
not clearly state that he had paid Van Koughnet for the trip, a reasonable 
conclusion on all the evidence is that he did not pay Van Koughnet and that 
the balance of the latter 1 s account after deducting the personal expenses paid 
for him by the deputation in Windsor was included in his statement rendered 
September 1st and was paid to him by cheque. On this finding, it follows that 
Mayor Kohl was overpaid for this trip $26.00. The evidence falls far short of 
establishing any fraud or deceit on the part of Mayor Kohl and on the evidence, 
I Cfin only conclude that it was a case of innocent mistake. 

ITEM C - $10.00 

This was a payment covering a trip by the Mayor to Toronto in con- 
nection with efforts by the council to advertise the natural facilities for 
skiing at Collingwood. The council was attempting to get some advantage" for 
the town as a result of these natural facilities by promoting a ski-club 
which would attract people, particularly from Toronto, who wished to indulge 



- 29 - 



in this sport, I find this payment to have been entirely justified. 

ITEM D - $25.00 

This was a payment covering a trip to Toronto. The item was not 
questioned during my investigation. Counsel to the commission had doubtless 
investigated it and found it to be a legitimate expense chargeable to this 
account. 

ITEM E. - $120.00 

This was a payment covering a trip to Farnham, Quebec, by Mayor 
Kohl and Councillor Borland. Councillor Borland had previously discussed with 
Benjamin Sobie, owner of Sobie Silk Shops, in Toronto, a proposal that he 
should transfer his factory from Farnham, Quebec, or open a branch factory in 
Collingwood. Following this preliminary interview, the whole subject was can- 
vassed by the industries committee and then the Mayor and Councillor Borland 
made this trip to Farnham, where they interviewed Mr. Sobie and discussed with 
him a proposed agreement between his company and the town of Collingwood. No 
itemized statement as to the cost of the trip was presented, but having re- 
gard to distance travelled and obvious items of expense that would be inciden- 
tal thereto, I find that the amount is not excessive. I am satisfied that a 
real effort was being made by them to induce Mr. Sobie to locate his factory 
in Collingwood. 

ITEM F ~ &87.00 



This item also covered expenses incurred in connection with Sobie 
Silk Shops and included a trip to Barrie by Councillor Borland to obtain legal 
advice and two trips to Toronto by him and Mayor Kohl, in connection with the 
same project. No itemized statement was presented, but I find on the evidence 
that the trips were justifiable and the cost reasonable. 

The apparent complaint by certain other members of the council with 
reference to all these items was that they could get no definite information 
from the members of the industries committee, either as to the name of the 
persons or corporations being interviewed or the nature of the hoped for in- 
dustries or what progress, if any, was being made. I accept Councillor Bor- 
land 1 s explanation as to this apparent secrecy, viz: that it was not advisable 

that this information should become public for the reason that other munici- 
palities might hear of these prospects and offer greater inducements to these 



- 30 - 



manufacturers than the town of Collingwood was offering; also, that Mr. Sobie 
did not wish his name divulged for fear of adverse reaction toward him and his 
industry in the town of Farnham. 

ITEM G - $65. 74. 

The miscellaneous amounts which make up this item were not discussed 
during my inquiry. I assume that commission counsel, upon investigation, was 
satisfied that they were justified and reasonable. 



WE" 



RE EXPENDITURES FOR LEGAL SERVICES MADE DURING THE YEAR 1956. 

By-law No. 1198 of tbae Town of Collingwood, passed by the Council on 
February 10th, 1936, appointed Mr. R. E. Fair, of the Town of Collingwood, 
Solicitor for the Municipality for 1936. 

By-law No. 1222 passed by the Council on June 8th, 1936, appointed 
the legal firm of Boys and Boys, of the Town of Barrie, special Solicitors to 
represent the town on all assessment appeals in 1936. 

These are the only By-laws in 1936 dealing with the appointment of 
solicitors or counsel. 

There Here, however, two resolutions passed by the Council during 
the year, dealing with this matter. 

1st - A resolution, No. 56, passed at a meeting on April L4th, 1936, as 

follows: 

"Be it resolved that the Finance Committee of the Council be 
given the power to consult with Messrs. Boys and Boys, or 
any other counsel whom they may select or decide upon, upon 
any questions arising in connection with any proceedings, 
action or any other matter in which the town is vitally in- 
terested; and to arrange for the remuneration of such 
counsel so consulted in any wyy or manner in which the said 
committee deems it advisable and in the interests of the 
Corporation. And the power herein given to the finance 
committee shall take effect as of the 15th day of January, 
1936. 

2nd - A resolution, No. 113, passed at a meeting on July 2nd, 1936, the 

general effect of which is that the finance committee be authorized 

to engage special counsel in connection with assessment appeals. 



... 

Both the foregoing resolutions were passed by the unanimous vote of 
the council. 

During the year 1936, the legal firm of Boys and Boys rendered legal 
services to the municipality on various matters, none of which had any refer- 
ence to assessment appeals, for which they rendered an account dated November 
12th, 1936, amounting to $518.71. (The account totalled $521.71, but of that 
amount $3.00 was for services in connection with assessment appeals) • The 
items in this account cover a wide range of municipal problems, the largest 
item of which, viz: $384-. 05, is in connection with litigation in which the 
town is the defendant and Spiral Nail Company, Limited, is plaintiff. Judg- 
ment was rendered following the trial of that action, in favour of the munici- 
pality, but the plaintiff has appealed from that judgment and the appeal has 
not yet been argued. In connection with the appeal, these solicitors state 
they have a further account, the amount of which has not been stated. On ac- 
count of the statement as rendered, the municipality made two payments, one on 
October 13th of $150.00 and another on December 26th of $200.00, leaving a 
balance of $171.71. The payment made on October 13th was recommended by the 
finance committee in a report, No. 11, dated December 15th, 1936, adopted by 
the unanimous vote of the council on December 15th. The payment made on 
December 26th was recommended by the finance committee in a report, No. 1, 
dated January 11th, 1937, and adopted by the unanimous vote of the council on 
January 11th, 1937. It will be observed that both these payments were made 
before the council had approved them. 

Then again, the legal firm of Long and Daly rendered legal services 
in connection with certain assessment appeals from the Court of Revision to 
the County Judge and rendered an account dated September 8th for $159. 10, Pay- 
ment of this account was recommended by the finance committee in its report 
dated December 15th, adopted by the council unanimously on December 15th, and 
vjas paid a few days thereafter. The cheque was issued on December 10th, but 
was held until the account was first approved by the council. 

According to well established legal authority, a by-law of a munici- 
pality authorizing the employment of a solicitor or counsel is necessary. A 
resolution is not sufficient. 



^~ v _£Xj, C^^ftw* Ali«^« 



- 32 - 



I, therefore, find that the municipality has improperly (due to the 

absence of the necessary by-laws) paid out for legal services rendered in 

1936, the sum of $506.10, as follows: - 

To Boys and Boys, - $ 3^7.00 

To Long and Daly,- 159.10 

.,$ 306.10 

I wish to add that the accounts rendered by these legal firms are, 
in in my opinion, reasonable and that my only reason for finding that the pay- 
ments were improper is the absence of the necessary by-laws. 

In addition to the foregoing, there are two other legal actions 

pending: 

1st- An action against the municipality by one James Richardson, a for- 
mer assistant assessor, who is claiming damages for wrongful dis- 
missal. The writ was served on the Clerk and handed by him to 
Mayor Kohl. The Mayor then instructed Messrs. Boys and Boys to 
defend the action on behalf of the municipality. Richardson is 
a close relative (a son-in-law as I recall the evidence) of Mr. 
Fair, the town solicitor. The action was started late in Decem- 
ber, 1936, and no pleadings have yet been delivered. 

2nd- An action by the municipality against one Joseph Smith for the 
return of machinery, the property of the municipality, allegedly 
wrongfully taken by the defenant, or in the alternative, 
damages. This action was not approved by the council. In fact, 
an action against him was never discussed by the council, al- 
though according to some evidence, the matter of a possible 
claim against him was mentioned at some meeting of the council, 
probably on December 15th. There is no mention of the matter 
in the minutes of the council meeting held on that date, nor in 
the minutes of any other meeting. In this action, Mr. Marshall, 
a lawyer in Orillia, was instructed by Mayor Kohl and one other 
member of the finance committee to issue the writ. The writ 
was issued late in December, 1936. 

In December, before the writ was issued, it was more or less 
common talk in the town that Joseph Smith would be a candidate 
for Mayor in opposition to Mayor Kohl, who had announced that 
he intended to seek re-election as Mayor for another terra. In 
view of the haste in issuing this writ and the fact that such 
action was not discussed by the council, I cannot help but be 
impressed with the fact that Mayor Kohl syncronized the time of 
the issue of the writ with the time of nominations in the town. 
This action against Smith would, of course, disqualify him as 
a candidate for office and I am of the opinion that Mayor Kohl 
was at least not unmindful of that fact. Supporting this opin- 
ion is the fact that at about the time the writ was issued, 
Mayor Kohl remarked to the town clerk that such an action would 
disqualify Richardson as a candidate. 

In any event, unless a by-law is passed by the municipality authoriz- 
ing the solicitors in each of these actions to represent the municipality, any 
account presented by these solicitors cannot be legally paid by the municipali- 
ty. 



- 53 - 



iiptt 



RE SALE OR OTHER DISPOSITION OF THE PROPERTY FORMERLY BELONGING TO THE ESTATE 
OF GEORGE ELDON, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SIMCOE STREET, 



IN THE SAID TOWN, MADE IN THE YEAR 1935 
OR 1956. 



The local description of this property is as follows: 

"ALL AND SINGULAR that certain parcel or tract of land and pre- 
mises situate, lying and being in the Town of Collingwood, in 
the County of Simcoe, and being composed of all of lot No. /£, 
on the North side of Simcoe Street or (East Ste. Marie Street) 
registered Plan No. 282, and more particularly described in 
Registration Number 6863, in the Registry Office for the 
County of Simcoe, at Barrie. 

This property is improved property and comprises a brick building used as a 

livery barn and one F. W. Eldon is in possession. 

On account of arrears of taxes up to and including 1951, this pro- 
perty was apparently regularly offered for sale by the municipality by public 
auction on December 16th, 1952, but no offer or bid was received for it. The 
tax sale was then adjourned to January 18th, 1953 and the usual notice was 
published in "The Bulletin", a newspaper published in the town of Collingwood, 
of the intention of the municipality to purchase these lands in case an offer 
was not made equal to the amount chargeable against them for taxes, costs, 
£tc. The said tax sale was later adjourned several times and finally was held 
on April 21st, 1955. There was no other offer for the property and it was 
sold to the municipality for $1842. 75 • The property was not redeemed and by a 
tax deed, dated April 25th, 1956, the property was conveyed to the municipality, 
This deed was registered on April 29fch, 1956. 

For some time prior to the said tax sale, one J. J. McCormack held a 
mortgage on this property on which a substantial amount remained unpaid and 
has not since been paid* 

In the years 1955 and 1956, it was assessed to "The Town of Colling- 
wood". In my view, the municipality could not assess itself, bub this "assess- 
ment" is of some importance in determining the amount which the municipality 
would have to receive on any subsequent re- sale by it, in order not to suffer 
any loss; that is to say, if the municipality on a re-sals should receive: 

1st - The arrears of taxes to December 31st, 1951, and 
2nd - the costs of the tax sale, and 

3rd - the taxes levied at the current rate in each of the years 1952 
to 1956 inclusive, based on the assessment in each of 
these years, 
then it would not suffer any financial loss due to the default and tax sale. 



- 54 - 



To the end of 1934, the accumulated taxes, penalties and costs com- 
puted in this manner amounted to $1051,37. To the end of 1935, they amounted 
to $1382.47. 

The propetty is still owned by the municipality and they are not re- 
ceiving any revenue from it, notwithstanding that F. W. Eldon is in possession 
of and using it. 

In May, 1936, Mayor Kohl received a verbal offer from F. W. Eldon to 
purchase the property and an agreement embracing the terms of the offer was 
prepared by the Clerk of the town. The purchase price was to be $700.00, pay- 
able as follows: $50.00 cash and the balance, viz: $650.00, to be payable 
$92.00 on May 19th, 1937, and thereafter $93.00 on May 19th in each succeeding 
year until the said balance would be fully paid, together with interest at L$ 
per annum payable yearly. The cash payment of $50.00 was paid to and is still 
held by the municipality, but the agreement was not executed nor wa.^ it ap- 
proved by the municipal council. Shortly thereafter, McCormack, the former 
mortgagee interviewed the finance committee of the council and later, on in- 
structions from Mayor Kohl, the clerk advertised this property for sale by 
tender. 

Two tenders were received, as follows: - 

1st - A tender from' F. W. KLdon dated October 20th, 1936, for $750.00, 
, Payable $50.00 cash (already held by the town) and the balance 
$50.00 "or as much more as may be desired" yearly, together with 
interest at t$ per annum. In this tender, Eldon states that he 
is willing to give McCormack a mortgage of $600,00, payable 
$50.00 yearly with interest at i$, payable yearly. 

2nd - A tender from McCormack dated October 19th, 1936 , of $400.00, 
payable $200,00 cash, cheque for which accompanied the tender 
and $200,00 on the acceptance of this offer and the "closing 
of the deal," 

Neither of these tenders have been accepted. 

However, at a meeting of the council held on December 15th, 1936, 
Resolution No, 159 moved by Councillor Borland, seconded by Councillor Mclntyre, 
was unanimously adopted by the council authorizing a sale of the property for 
$1350.00, of which $600.00 would be received by the town and $750.00 by 
McCormack and "that such agreement be drawn up to protect the interests of Mr. 
J. J, McCormack as well as the Corporation", There the matter stands. 



-35- 



It was not suggested during my investigation that the tax sale was 
in any way irregular, So far as the evidence indicated, it was entirely regu- 
lar. Accordingly, the interest "by tooth Bldon and McCormack in the property has 
been extinguished. It is difficult to understand the solicitude of the mem- 
bers of the 1936 council to "protect the interest of McCormack". Their duty is 
to protect the interests of the municipality. Even more difficult is it to 
understand why the council should he willing, as indicated by resolution No, 
159 to which I have referred, to accept from Bldon $600,00, when he had pre- 
viously agreed to pay the town $750,00, 

"G" 

RE EXPENDITURES MADE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OP A FENCE AT EXHIBITION PARK IN THE 
YEAR 1935 OR 1956 

In 1936, a new woven wire fence was constructed around a part of the 

exhibition grounds in the town. The total cost of this fence was $770,49, 

made up as follows:- 

Material,- $ 578.89 

Labour,- 191.60 (This was relief labour) 

Total,- $ 770.49 

The total cost of this fence was paid by the town. The town in turn would re- 
ceive from the Provincial and Dominion Governments part of the cost of labour 
under the general scheme for the division of the cost of welfare as between 
these governments and municipalities. 

The exhibition grounds are owned by the municipality and are leased 
to a society known as the Great Northern Exhibition Society. No written lease 
was produced. Town officials and officers of the exhibition society gave 
evidence and none of them had any recollection of ever having seen a written 
lease, but they all assumed that there probably originally was a written lease 
and that it had been lost. In any event, for many years it has been the 
custom for the society to pay the municipality & yearly rental of $400.00. Al- 
so for years, it has been customary for the town to make a grant to the society 
each year of $600.00. Deducting from this grant the annual rental received by 
the town, the net grant to the society was, therefore, $200.00. 

In the estimates for 1936 recommended to the council by its finance 
committee in its report No. 6 dated May 15th and adopted by the unanimous vote 
of the council at its meeting held on May 15th, appears an item under the 
heading "Parks and Tourists" of §500.00. According to the evidence, this was 



- 36 - 

intended to include, and I so find, the usual annual net grant to the exhibi- 
tion society of $200.00. 

In the early part of the month of June, 1936, officials of the exhi- 
bition society discussed with certain members of the finance committee of the 
town council the advisability of constructing a new fence around part of the ex- 
hibition grounds. During my inquiry, there was considerable evidence given pro 
and con as to the necessity of a new fence. The preponderance of that evidence 
was that the old fence was entirely inadequate and that a partial new fence was 
essential. I find as a fact that the new fence which was constructed was necessary. 

As a result of the representations made by the officials of the exhi- 
bition society, figures were obtained by the finance committee from fence manu- 
facturers. The first figures submitted were considered too high. The design 
of the fence was then altered so as to reduce the cost of material. Finally, 
the material was ordered from the Lundy Fence Company, Limited, of 257 King St. 
West, Toronto. At this inquiry, not any member of the council or town official 
would assume responsibility for ordering the material. It is significant, how- 
ever, that the invoice for the material which is dated July 30th, was made out 
as follows: "Corporation of Town of Collingwood, c/o Mayor C. Kohl". The Mayor 
instructed the town foreman McRae to supervise the construction of the fence. 

I find on the evidence that the fence was constructed without it being 
first authorized by the council; that the first knowledge certain members of the 
council had that the fence was being constructed or had been constructed was 
when they actually saw it or when some one other than a member of the council 
drew their attention to it; that the exhibition grounds come under the jurisdic- 
tion of the Parks and Tourists committee of the council and was not at any time 
discussed or considered by that committee and the chairman of that committee had 
no knowledge that it was being built until McRae, the town foreman, told him it 
was actually finished. Unquestionably, the Mayor and finance committee exceeded 
their jurisdiction in ordering the construction of the fence. All this resulted 
in a protest by certain members of the council and the Mayor was requested to 
call a special meeting of the council to explain what they considered usurped 
authority and unauthorized conduct by him. This meeting was held on October 
1st and as might be expected, it developed into a general wrangle. 

Notwithstanding all the foregoing irregularity, the council unani- 
mously approved payment of the materials accounts as follows: some small items 
purchased locally at a meeting held on September Hth and the major item of 



- 37 - 



material, at a meeting on October 27th, 1936. 

Apart from the irregularities above set forth, all of which were 
corrected by the council's subsequent approval of the bills, I find that the 
cost of the fence was reasonable. 

The unfortunate result of the manner in which the whole transaction 
was handled is, that as between the town and the exhibition society, there ap- 
pears to be a disagreement as to the arrangements which were made between them. 
There was no written agreement as between these two bodies. On the evidence, 
I find that the two bodies were never ad idem. The town officials, that is, 
the clerk and members of the finance committee had the understanding that in 
1937, as in 1936, the exhibition society would refund to the town the whole 
grant (it is assumed that the town will in 1937 make the usual grant of 
$600.00) $4.00.00 of which will be applied by the town as rent and the balance 
thereof, viz: $200.00, can be applied by the town on account of the cost of the 
fence. The officers of the exhibition society understood that in 1936, the 
society would refund the $200.00, i.e. the net grant and pay the town $50.00 
on account of the cost of construction of the fence, provided that the society 1 s 
profit for the year was $100.00 or more. It appears that due to rainy weather 
during the fall of 1936, the society 1 s profits from the exhibition were small 
and their profits for the year less than $100.00, as a result of which this 
payment of $50.00 was not made. The society does not understand that it is 
supposed to pay the town any further sums. 



By investigation disclosed very definitely that the council of the 

Town of Collingwood in the year 1936 was and this year is divided into two 

factions and that there is a woeful lack of co-operation between its members. 

In 1936, in one group was Mayor Kohl and councillors Ruppert and Borland (they 

constituted the finance committee) and in the other group was the balance of 

the council. Looking for the cause of this regrettable situation, I concluded 

there were several contributing factors: 

First - The finance committee and particularly Mayor Kohl, were inclined 
to and, in fact, did assume too much authority. This is shown 
by ray findings on the specific matters into which I was directed 
to inquire. 



- 38 - 



Second - The finance committee, when matters were referred to them, did 
not subsequently report to the whole council, and the other 
members of the council were left in the dark as to how these 
matters were finally disposed of. 

Third - Many matters of considerable importance were referred to the 
finance committee with power to act. These matters should 
have been dealt with by the whole council. 

I do not entirely absolve the other members of the council from blame 
in connection with the existence of these factions. Probably, they had a 
justifiable grievance and complaint, but in the interest of good government in 
the municipality they could have attempted much more than they did, to bring 
about harmony and co-operation in the council. 

During my investigation, there was some suggestion that the 
petition of these members of the council who sought this investigation was 
unwarranted, and that in so doing they were causing the municipality needless 
expense. I entirely disagree with any such suggestion. It may be that all 
the members of the council in the attempted discharge of their official 
duties may have intended to act in the best interests of the municipality. 
The fact remains that there was a deplorable failure to comply with the 
statute laws of the Province as affecting municipalities. I n their stead, 
the council sought to put into opeaation practices and regulations of their 
own making. I refer particularly to the wholesale practice of rebating or 
cancelling taxes. As a result of this practice, a complicated and intoler- 
able situation was developing and the whole plan or method for the imposition 
and collection of municipal taxes as established by the Assessment Act was 
frustrated. A premium was being paid to the tax delinquents and the other 
rate-payers who, in many instances, no doubt at considerable sacrifice, were 
paying their taxes in full, were correspondingly damnified. The duties of 
the Court of Revision had been delegated to the Tax Collector, and the Court 
of Revision had become a sort of official rubber stamp which, without inquiry, 
was purporting to put its official approval on adjustments and cancellations 
which the Tax Collector assumed to make. In addition to the foregoing, in 
some instances the private rights of ratepayers were disregarded and unlaw- 
fully infringed upon. In other instances, municipal funds were being spent 
without proper authority. Unquestionably, during my inquiry, there were some 
minor matters of complaint referred to, which standing alone, would not have 
justified the expense of this inquiry. The accumulation of municipal 



- 59 - 



irregular5.ties to which I have referred in this report, even though some of 
them had the approval of some of the petitioners, in my opinion, in the 
interest of good government, amply justified a public inquiry. 

All of which is respectfully submitted. 




&-^~ 



i!> 



COMMISSIONER. 



' W T 



*J 



APPENDIX 



SCHEDULE "2" 



Assessment 

Less Reduction 

and correction 
Taxable Assess't 

Exemption 

Total assessment 



1956 1955 ;L , 954 l^SS 

,201,057.00 $5,54-0,884.00 $5,926,556.00 $5,996,559.00 



595.784.00 
,605,255.00 

910.915.00 



15,007.00 



56 , 905. 00 



68.970.00 



$5,527,877.00 $5,870,651.00 $5,927,589.00 
927.655.00 1.201,746.00 1.228.860.0 
$4,516,168.00 $4,455,550.00 $5,072,597.00 $5,156,449.00 



Tax Rate 44 Mills 

1956 Taxes Levied $ 176,577.27 

Written off by 

Court of Revision 17.35Q.15 



55 Mills 
196,674.54 



47 Mills 
186,197.75 



45 Mills 
$ 179,855.95 



Collected 
Outstanding 



$ 159,127.12 
156.5^5.98 



142 f 446. 6 £ UP. 029.16 156 F 705. 80 



$ 22,785.1/ $ 54,225,89 $ 46,168.57 $ 45,152.15 



Assessment 
Less Reduction 
and Correction 

Taxable Assess't 

Exemption 

Total AssessH 



Tax Rate 



Taxes Levied 



Collected 



Outstanding 



1952 
$5,694,115.00 
5.800.00 
$5,688,515.00 

1.208.910.00 
$4,697,225.00 

45 Mills 
$ 184,140.91 
U5. 510.6 4 
$ 40.650.27 



THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION 
STATEMENT OF 
A3 AT 51st 



OF THE TQWH OF COLLINGBOOD 



nEBENTUKE 



DEBT 



SCHEDULE "1" 



CONSOLIDATED DEBT 



FIRE PROTECTION 
TAX AA.^EArtb 
UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF 
(Unsold 1,299.29) 



S 1012 

1057 

S 1099 
S 1U3 

1157 



ItlPERIAL STEEL AND MRE 113) 
(Unsold 2,980.23) L150) 



JRAIN ELEV ATOR 
tATERKORKS 






■ l.iTi.U^. 



S 1042 

941 

981 

S 1149 



965 

S 997 

10 S4 



S 996 
1080 



COLLEGIATE INSTITUTE S 983 
S 1013 



PUBLIC SCHOOLS 

TOTAL 



1041 



i 



Original 
Amount 

8,000.00 
8,600.00 
7,700.00 
7,300.00 



Date 
Contracted 



Year' a 

Currency Annuity 



Rate 



7,300.00 
6,400.00 
7,000.00 
7,000.00 



7,000.00 
7,000.00 
7,000.00 
5,800.00 
37,350.00 
4,945.00 
3,871.00 
4,066.00 
2,169.00 
2,379.00 
2,500.00 
2,586.00 
2,758.00 
3,000.00 
1.681. 00 

t!46. 103.00 

6.300.00 

t 12 r 650.00 

I 25,000.00 
25,000.00 
14.823.00 

i 64.823.00 



$ 34.000.00 

$788.000.00 

t 25,000.00 
6,000.00 
35.000.00 



t 66.000.00 

$ 2,600.00 

4,476.00 

988.00 

t 8.064.00 

$ 2,470.00 
2.075.00 

f 4.545.00 

$110,000.00 

22.000.00 

8132. OOP. GO 

» 2.100.00 

11.264.585.00 



Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
July 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
June 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dee. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Hay 1 
June 1 



1906 
1907 
1908 
1909 
1909 
1911 
1912 
1913 
1914 
1915 
1915 
1922 
1926 
1926 
1927 
1928 
1929 
1930 
1931 
1952 
1933 
1934 



June 1 1926 

Dec. 1 1929 

Aug. 1 1951 

Aug. 1 1932 

Dec. 1 1934 



Mar. 1 1928 



30 
30 
35 
30 
30 
30 
30 
30 
30 
30 
30 
20 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 
10 



10 

8 

10 
10 
10 



Oct. 1 


1934 


10 


Dec. 1 


1929 


25 


Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Aug. 1 


1922 
1924 
1934 


20 
20 
25 


Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 
Dec. 1 


1923 
1926 

1927 


20 
20 

20 


Dec. 1 
Dec. 15 


1926 
1930 


20 

20 


Oct. 1 
Dec. 1 


1925 
1926 


30 
30 



20 



491.1S 
527.96 
440.98 
443.15 
392.90 
429.74 
429.74 
455.36 
455.36 
455.36 
377.30 
3,125.42 
655.78 
513.56 
539.42 
280.89 
515.62 
331.67 
343.10 
565.90 
407.60 
228.59 



412.011.53 

815.88 

t 1,?96.98 

3,316.69 
3,316.69 
1.919.65 

8.5 53.03 



4.403.16 

55.800.00 

(Ap;rox) 

2,091.98 

502.07 

2.485.34 

5.077.39 

217.57 

374.54 

82.67 

674.78 

206.69 
173.63 

380.52 
7,155.65 
1.451. 15_ 

8.586.78 

168.51 



5f 

t 

5 



5f 
5i 
52 



Balance 
31st Dec. 19 3S 

469.98 

988.82 

2,908.62 

1,607.77 

1,724.99 

2,216.58 

2,532.36 

2,943.11 

3,236.64 

3,516.19 

2,913.41 

17,761.67 

621.59 

486.78 

995.96 

764.95 

1,106.28 

1,416.32 

1,715.86 

2,079.58 

2,531.14 

1.553.47 



56.089.87 

777.03 

5.687.05 

16,568.65 
18,848.67 
15.644.50 

49,061.82 



31.296.84 

676.000.00 

11,888.66 

3,490.54 

34.266.66 



49.645.86 

1,378.20 

3,031.08 

712.^4 

5.121.82 

1,672.66 
1.742.88 

- 3,415,.^ 
39.175.31 
18.348.7 6 

107.524.0 7 

.1, 582.90 

984.202.80 



Paid during 1926 


Balance at 


Interest due 


Principal 


Interest 


31st Dec. 1936 


31st Dec. I936 


469.98 


a.15 






483.47 


44.49 


505.35 




310.08 


130.90 


2,598.54 




375.81 


72.34 


1,231.96 




315.29 


77.61 


1,409.70 




350.04 


99.70 


1,886.54 




315.78 


115.96 


2,216.58 




308.21 


147.15 


2,634.90 




293.53 


161.85 


2,943. 11 




279.55 


175.81 


3,236.64 




231.65 


U5.67 


2,681.78 




2,148.53 


?76.88 


15,613.14 




621.59 


54.19 






486.78 


26.78 






484.65 


54.77 


511. SI 




242.65 


38.24 


522.50 




254.77 


60.85 


851.51 




253.77 


77.88 


1,162.55 




248.82 


94.29 


1,465.04 




251.53 


114.37 


1,827.85 




255.74 


151.86 


2,275.40 




135.20 


9«-20 


1.418. 





9.097.40 
777.05 

1 . 7 94 . .lg_ 

2,405.42 
2,280.02 
1.237.42 



2.915.92 
38.85 



202.80 

911.27 
981.68 
682.22 



46.992.47 



1.892.87 

14,161.23 
16,568.65 
12.407.08 



5.922 .86 2.575.17 



2.858.51 

22.000.00 

1,438.10 
310.09 
770.00 



1JJ64-85. 

53.700.00 

653.88 

191.98 

1.713.34 



2.518.19 2.559.20 



141.77 

207.83 

43.49 

395.09 

114.70 
77.78 



19S .Ad 



2,696.89 

515.6' 



75.80 

154.65 

59.18 

269.61 

92.00 
95.85 

187.85 
4,458.77 
917.44 . 



10,450.56 

3,180.45 

88.496.66 

ja. K7.67 

1,236.45 

2,823.25 

669.05 

4.728.75 

1,557.96 
1,665.10 

86,478.42 
17.335.07 



-Mote . »S" refers to Debentures Guaranteed by the County of Slacoe. 




55.00 



43.138.96 

28.458.55 
654.000.00 



55.00 




100.00 






12.07 


12.07 



























LiO 
















0?I 






8( 
































































































isnr 












:aL 













'tV 


-. '* V 




' 




' j 


,v 




r.A r 




t ' 




,v 


■' 


tV 


. 


<v 




? 






















. 


\A 


. 










■ 










. 









. .. 






SIOI 3 















■ 



. 





















'2 ' 






. 






(SSI 1MI 

( 
























■«A 





















. 



• 



OS 






.•--— * 















V 



V.