LOCAL OPTION POLL.

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 420, 1 February 1909, Page 7

LOCAL OPTION POLL.

THE HUTT CASE. DECISION OF THE COURT OF INQUIRY,

;-; ,NO PROPOSAL CAKEIED; ; : ;A : , O .The;final word magisterially ifi'connection 7 with the'. Court, of Inquiry into, the conduct ' of tho recent local, option poll at the'Hutt was said on, Saturday morning, .-whett;. the '••■;■. reserved decision of the Bench). Dr.■-■'. A;-'. M'Arthur, S.M., .and Messrs.-W., G. Riddell V:. : »nd W. P. James, S.M.'s,.was .delivered'• at-?.-; ■ the Magistrate's Court." ■"'■■■:}:.}:.' : ; /.,-/"•/..;::\;.V Messrs. A.: R. Atkinson and H.H. Ostler ;: represented'the. petitioners, and Messrs. A.". -" W. Blair and W. J. Cracroft, Wilson". ap-v poared on behalf of tbe respondents. .:'//>.■■ ■'•. ■ Tho.decision of-the Oourt.deali very, fully '•* '■■; with tho : authorities regarding,,the voiding of elections as covered by the'partial jute ■ :.: ment already given, "and/went on to deal with numerous other- authorities pn ; -thei subject; "■".-"' The original petition consisted of 46 allegations, .'but some of these 'had, been abandoned orihad been thrown but by.the Court before■/./ ;the case .for tho.respondents, was opened.' , '..■•_,'v- :..:; .Requirements of the Petition. . . ; ;}'\y The Court was required'by tbe petition v<l), , : To hold. an; inquiry int<s tho conduct of; tho' ; ; poll and to determine—'' ; .' : y : ;:v. ■~; ■;; ■.^'(a).That'\theVprbpo^i , 't^trNo'iiicense"be ! !7T granted, in the Hutt District was.;.. duly.carned at the said poll.' •":"■ . ' : '' ;: .- h {b) Or in the. alternative, that the poll ma ';■;;; void.' I'-:'-. " : ' ; ' : .■'■;■,■':.'...' -. ".■'. ■':', -/A; ■"' ; "■'..-/ : '" ;.;..:',.:, .'Rowers of,the Court. ..-.. ■<; ->.V/ •;■; ■<■>■■■• Dr:. M'Arthur. stated that: the-powere of' ■ the Court were clearly set out. in Section 33/.' sub-Section lof the Licensing Act, 1908. The : .'. : " Court had to determine whother ; by reason'■;. of some irregularity, that. in. ats".opinion ■.. materially affected the result of .the. poll;' tho ,: poll was void,'or'whether.any,Jind what, prov.-V posal,: Was'duly caijried.; : The..Crder' of, /the; ;;< Court..'on any such ."determination; should:' BuperSedo. the Returning Officer's; publio de-';,, : claratiottiof of the'pbll and thould, ;;'■ take eff eot accordinßly;' .Persons committing!-; irregularities■.should be reported; in .writing; i. to the Minister, by- the ohaifinati., : ,',''.,'; : >,7 The Minister might direct proceedings fcr : ■■/ the. prpseiiiition, of any::person.named in'the )" reportr;; ; :V-.;- • : ;:'^ ; .. .'■*:■■;:' - ■\'.-:-'}yi}f;-:;.^'-iV : . ;.:The Court might order .costs.'.-' ;\ ; ' '.^,v'fc : '<:\ Returning; dmoer"and- Scrutlnear.; ' :■:■}'. ■s. ( < : allegatioh', 17. in '•.thei petition,;; ■ 'the:. Court' considered some"cpnyeriation"! took. .. placei between 4hd'.'returning.', officer'and.'a'•.; scrutineer, jn roferpnee.to the licensing bal■lot. bos, ibut such '.conversation? was not' ad- . ■■ dressed to'a voter. !There was.absolutely n6; , ; oyidence. that, the returning habitually V spoke to voters ;..but the'eorivetsatipft betweea , ■. the returhihg: officqf and the scrutineer, was;..;' injudicious, and should not have taken place.. i ; ; i V ' v -' ; -';r; : jhe' : T^iia';Bo^th. ; '^r":.:W:'v;":';p '■.Some irregularity .had'Aaken;place in con-; , ,-. hectibn -with the; Taita-booth j: and ar-,, j. rangements for voting, but'it did. not affect :f: ; the. eecrecy of the ballot, nor the result (A v f the: poll. .''ln. the opinion "of the Court, in ally;.;; polling booths there should -be proper . ooiov>:.' partments' set. for. .voters..;-.";';^'\' T-''-r'' x :'(: '■ i VBallot .Paperi Not Tampered With.'...: i•-'■. '■; •Section,24 of;the;petition _alleged,".under;.; various sub-headings, gross irregularity'.'at : - -returning officer's'count... . ; :. -: ". ■'■; - : '(l)lt:was alleged that the'returning;officer.; > -iljegally\neglected tp'scrutinise'.tho rells.used'-.; ■: by, : the deputy.Returning.ofßoers'.:'; No evi-y.'-dencoof this was produced, and it had been'; hold that the faot that 1 votes were not duly; " .scrutinised "was.not sufficient.toset aside.an\.• electipn>unless- : -would been;.. affected byat-.i ■ ; -' , ,'..■'.. ( ..■■.';.-'. '■:■ '".,- ,~:5 '■ r'-:': r-ii*(2.Vi-The. allegation thatiJDowie; and Webb ■■'; '■(officials at the poU),weTSlactive: pariisans o£ ■•■- ■the/trade had not .only not been ;■ it ';■, had been disproved. .:-.;:'■ .x '•■■■ •'.'.■'■.•'■-..'• ' ; ;(3)- The -litter.in the.hall where the count took placo'. : had". been swept. up, and y did nob.;; in ■',any ; .way■:interfere': with the fairness .or;■•' •progress of. , the count.-: '. ■ -. ;•;,'■ ■; ; ';(4)-Tlie";returhing officer did.exercise effeo-t" tivocontrol over his assistants, and the Court ;. . didvnot consider-the ballot'papers had been ; tampered with. ; .',.■':• '-;*■ . ;. . ! ; '! \ i;, (6) The...returning officer.: was absent' fop : .; ■lunch for.about '.throe-quarters', of an ;honr, r ; .and for;, a minute ortwo on: two occasions for ■'. ■■- inecegsary purposes'. The count , did not'pro-■'.\: ceed in' his absence :._:."i..'.;and -the papers • were not tampered, with during his'absence, {.'■' as'-was shown by. the fact that/the number-".! . irig: remained l as before his absence..- : ...; :;■'.;■; sKNoI'LIQUOr, ':.;'■';.■::■ '■■;/ '{■'..'-\ •■-,(?)■' The returning officer did not allow. , , ; toxicating be brought into thehall, : and .there '".was, ho .evidence, that 'any-suchV .: :liqnor vvas-drunk by. anjr.-pf the persons,eh- -~. gaged in : -the'..count ,, during its progress,., or s. even that there was any such liquor in the .''■' .hail. ■■.■■■- ; -,^ , :-:-:■;■. ,■■:■.;.■■•.■::;-..::;•■:.-.^;; '■ (7) .Tho' , allegation, that- the.'.'• 'Returning.: Officer: had opened the door during' the count;, ,; ■and allowed; the ! ;wind : to scatter some huh.; v dreds".of ballot-papers.over the floor was;*;" gross 'exaggeration.;• :; ■"■;<.■ ;"■■" '■'■:. ' ■ : •".' ;' >■■.':■ : - (8) /There 'was . ni> -proof, of; the. .allegation >;.■ that' one ballot -paper.: was 'oither , ; .lost •. or-; . stolen during-the l count. Section No" 9; was":;; an allegation, v-ague iii the extreme, arid there ; ; . .'■ was; nothing.whatever to. support. it. ;, . ;•..'' :■;. ; (10)/ The .Court was "unoblo tpvaccept , uh« :.<■ supported ■ eyide'rico an allegedly . ; altered:ballot ! paper.;; /:■■■'. : ,t&J.\ '■';,• : ; ' v ;:;-'=? :; ;,^.-"^:i^lsptod.BaHpt : .Papefs.V;/ : ;:;v ; :-C ; ,(11), ii'Tvasiafact, that by some linoxplained;,: means a,-parcel, of 22.'.ba110t:; papers-.",(N0-;:-' License,.and/Reduction) .was included among ;•.; the: Continuance votes'.; Tho error was /dis-;;-coVered:iin the Magisterial/count,- and .1hf1 % ,. : . % r otes were "duly .recorded for. Reduction and I;;' No-Licerise.i The.Court considered;that;some-.;.-one/engaged; in -.the .count. : inadvertently i' : placed'. the.'.22,.ballot . papers, on', ,tho" wrong'; : ' square ;of the chart, : and thusj the. error took;/ . place, but, this'Court'saw. no'reaso'n':to impute, a corrnpt; motive .to .anyone: and there. .V'asV not a tittle of evidence to'support a'supposi-:---/ tion. .of illegal conduct. respect _to the;.;'; other !Wo ballot "papers':discovered in the,■'■ wrong.bundle, the Court, attributed .if to 6n;V.error in: placing .the two. votes on the wrong: ■. sqiiare or. ;..The : error:,:; was f.or-'"'■'.' rected-.at tho Magisterial .: count. '■ Th- : rh< opinion of the Court the.'count;;conducted.bj ' ;the ;Returnirig ; Officor. :- was:-not'.:chara"cterised ::. r: bv-gross irregularity.:.. Such.irregularities as' did,.take place did not affect.in'.anj .way xua ■■'. result'of : the-ppU;;•;■.'■■'■''.>>■';■.. v|- ■■■'■ '.■■; ....-:.•'. {: .V-f,. ■'; ■:■'■' ■ : '\'\ /Doubled Nanie&i , ; -. :': ■:::;:-",::■ ■i■ (26) In the case; of.Yivian Henry Sanson, ■''■'.. whose name was scored out as having vot«<3 : ; at two:polling',.booths,-;the; , -.' Court had : no;.-. doubt'.that Mr. 'Sanson did not;vofo.at more."/ than one polling.'booth. .. No,, satisfactorj ./; evidenco had. been given by,, the respondents :■;;' -jn. explanation 'of tho- voting at the' second - booth. .'ln'.roforenco tothe.hamo of Georcfi : House,"; there -was.,one; vote recorded at the.!■■ Oddfellows' Hall, Pctonp , , 'and p'no;-at the ';; Lo'wer'Hutt.'-;.'Tho Court considered that;the "; 'evidence: was sufficient to',convince' it that',;. .there were two distinctjpersons of that'name '. who voted, but that by some error the George: . House ■:(No; 2560)J.was scored off at both "pol-:y-ling booths and"another.name of':. George : House was'-left on: tho roll- raicaucelled. - In : ;■ the: cases "of'Sarah ; Armitago, John-Arnold, '■'■■; Edith'MaUd. Botlmin,' Joseph Enoch Jackson, :~ Arthur Henry Pringle, and Amy Belcher, • them was;no.evidence.of.a second vote hav.-. , . ■' ing- been recorded. ;; .; ;■; ; '.- .. A "- 27. James Maxwell Cameron . (809): .and ; \ Henry Nicholson (3904) were both on the : : roll, but were. resident "out of- tho district be-; -'' ■ yond the statutory period of six months. . In_ : Niohplson's caso.tho: rpspondente attempted ..' to prove that ho had been actually and Ivmafide resident in tho district for not less than six days either separately or continuously. Tho Court considered that the onus was on the respondents to provo tho residence for sis days, andthat they had not discharged that onus. A Deputy's Povjors. 28. Concerned Lilian Ann Clark, who had received a ballot paper for .the licensing poll Witness said sho had made a mistake in it' • and demanded from the deputy roturnint? officer a new paper, which was refused her! ' She then went back to the compartment and scratched out the thieo-liaea and jglaced the

ballot paper in the ballot box. Thero ■was nothing m tho Act to compel the deputy roturmng officer to give a second ballot paper. He might do so in tho case o c a spoilt ballot paper, and the question nould be asked what was a spoilt ballot paper ? It uas one which had been inadvertently dealt with in such a mannor by the \otor fcut it could not be conveniently used as a ba.'lot paper. Thero was no evidence whatecir of Mrs. Clark's paper having been spoilt The "Liberty" Placard. 81. This allegation had reference to f he driving of a motor car about the district having displayed on tho back of it a placird representing a mail holding up a pot of boor with tho word "Liberty" written in largo 'letters thereon. The car was driven by the son of the licensee of tho Piowncial Hotel, Upper Hutt, uho asserted that ho did not know of tho placard until informed of it by the constable, when ho removed it His action, tho Court considered, constituted an irregularity under Section 35 (e) of the Licensing Act, 1908, but there was no ovidenco to show, nor did the Court think that it m any way affected the result of the poll. 35. It was stated in this Bection that during the hours of polling a conveyance was driven through the streets ' of Petone in which conveyance was a large tank, on the sides of which was displayed a placard similar to the one described in the previous sec-1 tion. The Court had no reason to disbelieve the account given by tho driver, who stated that he drove the cart and tank in the ordinary way of business directly from Wellington through a portion of the Suburbs electorate, and to the yard of his employer in Petone He stated that he there unharnessed and turned the horse out, and left the cart coni taming the tank in the yard, where he found it nest morning. The Court did not consider that there was any demonstration in this case, but that there was probably some confusion as to the tune when' it was said to have boon seen by two witnesses. Allegations Concerning Liquor. 37. This related to the liquor in a shed within one hundred yards of tho Wallaceville polling booth. The Court felt compelled to accept tho evidence of, Mr. Thomas Edwards as to the presence of the liquor in the shed. Edwards was a well-known, member ©f the Hutt County Council, and to the Court appeared a witness worthy of credit. There was no evidence to connect the liquor with the licensing poll, except the faot that its distribution took place on polling day. Edwards's explanation was feasible The Court was of opinion that the presence of the liquor at the time and place where it was TV as an unfortunate occurrence, but considered that there was no evidence to show that the distribution of this liquor totfded to i influence tho poll. 38. There tv as no evidence in support of the presence of liquor at Pencarrow. In clauso 39 it was alleged that on polling i day a quantity of liquor was sent by one Palmor, a licensed pubhcaiv at Petone, to a polling booth with a view to influencing the poll. Palmer had supplied lunches to some of tho officials, and also a. few bottles of beer as liquid refreshment. The evidenco solutoly discredited any intention of influencing the poll A similar allegation was mado, with reference to the Oddfellows' Hall, the principal polling booth The Court held->that there was nothing to show ' that tins had . been done to influence tho result of tho poll In neither instance was it even insinuated by witnesses that any of the officials were effected by the liquor which thoy drank Regarding the allegation that beer was distributed from a room in tho Town Hall, Lower Hutt, with a view to influencing the poll, the Court hold that the whole woigbt of evidence was <-that the beer was for workers only. There 'was nothing to show that it in any way influenced the poll. There was no evidence whatever to connect "the trade " with the beer which a man named Sonthee had m his express at Akatarawa when driving voters to the poll This, in the Court's opinion, had no influence on the poll. _ /iT j The evidence in support of the allcgalidn r thatthq Provincial Hotel, Upper Hutt,'was. open.,on polling Jay was based solelyVp'ori the fact of the door being open and a number of persons going in and out, some of whom it was said were intoxicated There was, however, direct evidenco that the bar was closed, and that no'liquor was either sold or given away at the hotel. The constable had stated that he was in the hotel on Beveral l occasions, and on every one of them the bar was closed. ' The evidence showed that there was liquor' in the stable attached to the Provincial Hotel, and that free drinks wore distributed 'to certain electors, but to whom the Court conld not say. The stable did not belong to tho hotel, having been leased some eighteen months ago to tho present lessees There was nothing to connect this treating with "the trade, or to show that it had any influence on the poll Petition Dismissed.

: , "After.careful and full consideration," con- - . eluded the judgment, we have come to: the' conclusion that .the irregularities iwiimitted : • did not:affect, tho. result' of the p<Jll. --As to 'if ; ;y:: s the yotes of: Sanson,. .and Nicholson- : •♦though on a scrutiny they mighihavetobe . disallowed, yet as such disallowance would . Jiofc affect- tho result of 'the poll, wo consider -.it unnecessary .to order a scrutiny. We do-.' termino that no proposal, was carried," and ' the .petition is dismissed." , '• •. .' • The Court ordered the petitioners to' payj,h& ' respondents fifty, .solicitors'. costs, to- : ..; i/:. -■: gether with: .witnesses' • expenses, advertising, ; . typewriter's expenses, and .other actual dis- ' bursemcnts,.to be settled .by the-Clerk'.'of the: Court (Mr. A. H. Holmes). U-'.'i;': ;.'v Mr. Blair. asked.. that the, recriminatory , ::'. .: r P e titi'on lodged.,by, the ~ respondents .be 'with-' drawn. ' -. ■ The Court agreed to this, declining to aIW -: . any costs to the' petitioners. on the counter petition. - INTERVIEW WITH REV. R. WILSON. . - SUGGESTED ALTERATIONS IN THE LAW. ■ The Rev.- R. Wilson, . who.has taken an active part in the inquiry,' and is one far tho. ' f* principal petitioners m,the 'case,- was 5 waited ■ V,' upon by a reporter for his views on the judgment of the. Court. :-- : - " You- see," stated Mr.'Wilson, "we believe wo fairly won tho election, 1 were ..' hopeful '-that ;.the > result <- (jf --the'.anquiry would. have given us tho victory ,to- which- wo. feltwo were justly, entitled.; *We were greatly disappointed early in" the case that.the Bench . refused to ". take' advantage of. the Act for V the purpose of including alleged, irregularities, antecedent, to the day of-tho poll. This was . done, at the instigation of. the' ' Trade' : in - the Masterton case, and gave their Bide every chance to'upset a No-Licenso verdict.- The refusal- of a majority of' the. sam'o Bench > ' ' a.similar privilege—well, to put .-.-.-;-■/•-. :it.gently,"..caused ai'inild .seiisation'.This ,V'' ruling demolished four important; charges:'in' a single breath. It shut out of Court any reference to. the compilation of -.tho roll: ' Every election is dependent upon a roll.. If the processes used-in "compiling it are to.be •, ignored, serious complications" are inevitable. If this_ interpretation holds good, a registrar .V , ;; - may,intentionally or unintentionally,' leave off the roll as many names as-he chooses, and, "though he may be .punished for so doing, how,- -. ever enormous; the offence may be, it would r.ot be a 'sufficient ground for.'upsetting an ; election.: All suoli matters are antecedent to the poll, 'and,' therefore, - outside- the 'juris-: diction of the Court. This ruling would tend' to make the carrying of No-License 'ari : utter . . impossibility in any part; of tho Dominion." - Aro thes6 the only groundsupon which:you' i. take exception t-othe decision of the.Court? "No," replied Mr. Wilson, "there,: aro' Boveral.others: eqiially vital. For instance; . ;-i the judgment in reference to alleged irregu-' : ' larities concerning the secrecy: : : of the.ballot ■ is one of the most astonishing judicial .utter-: , anccs given : for gome years. That it Iwill ;. create a feeling of unrest throughout the Dominion is hardly open to doubt; ioThe 'point was this: Did the returning officer make due provision for oomparfcments, as specified by the Act? 'There is only_ one answer, 'No!' . • Well, , then, did this omission tend to influence the- result?:.' Remember .the voting- inthese particular places was large, and that,' vVro business -interests are -involved, nothing so much as open voting is more likely to influence the result. Remember, too, we ; Dnly required five votes. I submit on this Dtie item alone we were entitled to; the ver-' : : ' diet.' '. v . ' ' . ;;: "Tho of the Court in reference to 'iho' destination of ballot lmes and tho vcr-

djot. of Dr. M'Arthur in the Newtown case of sixv years ago aro diametrically opposed to each other. In the Newtown case the margin, of votes was, I think,'.B; here it was only $..;. Yet the' judgment in the Newtown case indicated-that the detention of a single box overnight inight'have affected.a margin so small, -and'i.the' poll wa'ij voided. As the result.of. the .Newtown'-" verdict, the Act. was amended'in-rcference : to this very point, and the amendment demanded that boxes shall be returned to the returning officer 'with allipossible dispatch.' : \ ...■.: .•"The, evidence, respecting the recount at the Oddfellows'; Hal!/' continued Mr. Wilson, "indicated , bungling. The evidence respecting 'the'free■ distribution of liquor in the electorate'• was ignored' by the Bench, with the one.exception.of the Upper Hutt. Here the Bench ruled it was proved, but also ruled that'we failed to. prove agency. The astonishing wiUihgries's i,with : .which the Bench aeceptea ; tho : the_ones of the other side in refer-ence-to' this -liquorpoirft is truly amazing." "Costs were..awarded/against our party in the face of the fact ;tbat the judgment ruled that several irregularities were proved by ,the petitioners', and also in face of the fact that the Bench practically gave us another" three votes.".: '■:•■■. •. : "■., -. . . '.■' : ■. -.-' .■.. Does the inquiry suggest any needful alterations to, : the Act? •. ... ■':.- '■■■ . . "The inquiry 'has .clearly shown the weakappointing! oner person to the dual position .or Registrar of' Electors and that of Returning.c Officer;--:. In::the.interests of the ; man.rhiraself, .and-'also-tof: .the ■ public,..an amendment here;is imperative. Such ap-' - pomtments.: should also '■ carry, ; with thorn a signed declaration that such persons are not partisans of.the 'Trade.'". . ' ' ■ -:. Nor."of the. No-License party? . : : -<- .. -',■■■ "We 'should. ;have' no objection, but the P 0^ n *;.P f ,;. c ?nti:ast,is, ; h!ere that the 'Trade' have, great; financial interests involved, whilst we havejione.:, We believe that there should ■ i>l .*.{? we; control'.respecting the compilation of the,rp]l.;,. The thrown this as-far ■as,securing names "is. concerned on to local ~enterpnse.;i ' The,Act,.'should- also make, 'proappointment of 'scrutineers of ootn .sides at the recount; and for some method W 9 -r+l g :%, r<; count on more scientific fj^ e , s v appointment of an outside person :^.>* al ?e,charge.;.6f absentee voters' permits ,der that, ouglrfc tovbe rectified. We'are also ; of the opinion; that; should be con■■fS*&™ & t ' lre : i b #.re.;two. Supreme Court Judges,^,The;gopdwi.ll n pf hotel property in this- electorate' would ,be worth in Iy. ;= :MR;,dAfIEY:jjiTZCSE RALE'S VIEWS; : ' : ;:■'[ .;;w9(iwST^jGONTBQL.;.' '\:]' - -'. r When approached'by a rerjorfor -fnr. i.-i'. s .on CarirKtztrald iF mi? ./*'the:,:Hutt:Talley LiceSfic :-.,.. :t he our friend 1 ■ T ? f y ™ ng ■ to. a • close, ™^ ! u : n , d .ertook: the. f duties of-my position ;J rf' thei-workil.md with- • agamst ;ahyindividuals or any &j*®' P y^r » :tos : forced me to wrm.6trong-.opmions.on many pbases.of the : -Vs'/well-, a 8 to give ine firm ' contest.-•.Notwithstanding; the marked■- in- ■ crease, m ;the' vote, I am. satisfied that the ■movem'cnt'hM bo ;logical basis nor c^iWren to be : an aid to. the more S* ?and , moree * c . f >>e temperance work •whic.h.,. l s ); .makmg,.considerable' progress' in n ee;peopie we\fra d' toiPSMfcthe prohibit on. issue, .because they. - W prdportion. of 'topers'- : moderates- andjimmoderates—who would re'■■iV**M K.deprived,6f,;their■ liquor are' too--lmers, for various reigns, 'and .^H' under isting conditions :.sp..Jong as No-License .does ™t iW e S n -.ffl?^ I SuW,,,r,Theji..side by side with! ■the.:.onwardVmaroV;.,of. f [the.r;hiovement: is the J y.v,*M-*«nough.;fpesli- accessions are into "the.; ranks,, .a. greater national 'thirst; is being, developed each.,year WjP owe'rless to .quench; -.This fact .prove's no; matter : man mavvotp mihepnvaoyofthe ballpt.fei.he wTfnevt : .theless : refuse tci do without his beer '"' i : :; " me," •'■' to : L matter ' namely-State control of liquor: The Lablur >.party 'are disposed/to.declare.for State:controJ; and ;aro-hoping-imistakenly I 'am sure' ~7t°' : f^ I 1 No-License:■' However, comparatively short- space , •°Ktime,: State control of liquor will, be a aiving jsEUe in; Dominion politics, and the that banner.,is. lmf.urled, there will .secession-from, the' No-License-f? n .? s -i /he ■■ ekc.tors;.;seem -.deterinined -''to* Change.the.jresent system of liquor control, but■:•they .appear. to ; ,be : equally,determin<jd :to ;maintain,'the l ng4t;tov procure and to consume',it,Mand:,l»!am;Batisfied therefore: that, once: the,, alternative ..of State. control ib- o'f■fered;to.rtlieni tlie-No-License' movement will lose, its momentum, for...the!.real battle will then- .be{.between 'th'e suppo'rters of private -enterprise and:, the ...advocates of State .control. ~Many .men',have ;lost- their, life's savings and;the prosperity and comfort 'of, fam■"J les T ?ave: beenrdestrdyed;by.!the carrying of without,' any corresponding benefits ■ being.,-.brought;: to, .the., community. I •shall always remember my sojourn:in Peten'e, an d,.I :f ;h.ope.. ! the,',expenence' I. have gained! jwill .he; of (advantage,tb,,me in niy future life. ;I. would'like;-to,p"ublicly,vacknowkdge the impartial, and, generous, manner. in ; which my association has,treated me, especially.its president, Mr.. H. J.': Palmer, than whom there ■is not,a'strajghter nbf a whiter man in the D0mini0n." ; :;..:..\;.v.:,: .' .; "■.-- v v ■: ;

■It •'.is expected, that the : sum ..to be paid by: petitioners ,to respondents' will be £200 ..■■■■■.:.-■'... '■'.'■--' ■• ■' '' -'.At meeting iof ■ the executive of the Hutt NoLicense. : league ■willebeiaeld this evening to consider,-the ',;...;. -v.-.-.-.'. , , ,