QUARTERLY LICENSING MEETING.

Evening Star, Issue 3365, 2 December 1873, Page 2

QUARTERLY LICENSING MEETING.

(Before I. N. Watt, Esq., K.M. ; E. ff. Ward, Ksm.; ( *. Flexmin. Esq.; IT. S. Fish, Esq.; JUKI K. H. Leary, Esq., J.P.’s.), MCKNSKS OR NO LK'KNSKS, Before the day's business was commenced, Mr Watt remarked ; With respect to .applications for new licenses of all sorts, the Bench is of opinion that they have no authority to grant any.- Mr Harris, who appeared to support several applications, said if that was the decision of the Bench, he asked that-undcr the circumstances their Worships receive the applications, and allow the consideration of them to he adjourned until the first meeting the Bench held under the new Act. -Mr Watt: But under the new Act a now licensing n special (hunt comes into existence. Wo sit here now for a very large district, but those who may compose the future Court will, I apprehend, be appointed under section Dunedin, for example, is divided into four subdivisions ; and therefore. I apprehend, whatever we may do here now will have no effect upon any future (Mint. —'Mr Harris thought the Bench must deal in some shape or another with the applications. -—Mr Watt; Then we must record “appliea* tions refused.”—Mr Harris :Or adjourn, as the case may be. —Air Watt: I don’t see that we can adjourn.--Mr Harris remarked that if the Bench had power to sit they had power to adjourn.- --Mr Watt: But I have doubts whether we have power to sit, and our power of adjournment is strictly limited to one fortnight.--Mr Harris : A fortnight at a. time.—Mr Watt, speaking from memory, thought the power - to adjourn was limited to a fortnight.- -Sir Haggitt, who also appeared to support some, applications for new licenses, was not aware of anything in the Ordinance' which prevented the Bench from granting new licenses, nor could he see how the question came to he raised. He supposed it had only been the expression of an extra-judicial opinion from the Bench. Mr Watt: Exactly ; I said we wore of opinion that we could not grant now licenses.--Mr Haggitt contended that there was no amendment of the law of which their Worships could take notice, and when his aplieatiou conic on for 'consideration, he would ask the Bench to deal with it. He agreed with Mr Harris, that if the Bench had power to grant transfers, they had power to grant new licenses. —Mr Watt: The sixth section of the Act says: 44 I'm? ]?ei*M?u, unless V>«s duly licensed under this Act, shall sell any alcoholic liquors, or permit or suffer the same to be sold by any other person on his behalf ; and any person who shall be convicted of doing so shall be

liable to a penalty of not exceeding fifty pounds for every such offence.” • That 1 take to be prohibitory when the license to lie granted is an annual one only, to be applied for in a special maimer in March, and to be decided unon by a Court to bo held on the third Tuesday in April. Ymi observe the license is not quarterly or half-yearly, but an animal one to bo granted on a. certain day, and by certain peoplcj who must be cither a resident magistrate, having jurisdiction over the district, or a resident magistrate appointed for the purpose, and not less than three nor more than seven Commissioners.—Mr Haggitt: I can see all .your Worship urges ; but, at the same time, if you have no power to grant new licenses, except under this Act, you have no power to grant transfers, or, indeed, to sit at all.—Mr Watt : Probably yon are correct. Tam doubtful whether we have any.power whatever, though wc might possibly sit and have power to transfer licenses. The Act says nothing about transfers, and there is no conflict on that point.—Mr Haggitt : But the Act says something about licenses, and, of course, there is a conflict there. I ask that the Bench grant the licenses, leaving them to the after operation of the law. —Mr Watt: But I don’t think that wc sitting here as Magistrates should be asked to do that which is illegal. The Governor may stop the gap that has unfortunately occurred, but I don’t think that we, sitting here as Magistrates, can do so.—Mr Stewart pointed out that it would be manifestly unfair to grant new licenses to take effect on January 1, thus practically rendering nugatory that part of the Act which gave to two-thirds of the inhabitants the power to prevent a. Court from granting a license, or, in other words, took away the Court's discretion. Whatever the Bench might feel disposed to do in reference to transfers, it would clearly be a violation of the spirit and letter of tiie Act were they to grant new licenses, which would over-ride the rights to which he had referred. —Mr E. Cook also addressed the Bench, after which it was decided to take each application for a new license separately, and adjourn a decision until aft the counsel had been heard. Mr Harris, for Mr Alexander Love, then applied for a license, for a house situated on Saddle Hill, and produced a memorial signed by H)0 residents of the district in favor of the application ; and added that the want of a licensed house at this spot was greatly felt by draymen ami travellers generally, it being at the top of the hill, and just where a rest should he given to horses. The memorial was also signed by all the neighboring holders of licenses. He presumed that the sixth section of the Act of I'->7-> could not be hold to be in operation until the Act itself came into full operation, that was when the Bench or Court named sat as a Court to grant licenses under the Act. That time had not .yet come -nor would it come to April next. Section 31 showed clearly that the intention of the Legislature was that the Provincial < )rdiuance in force at the time of the passing of the Act should continue in force, and the powers—and this he had no doubt was the intention of the framer—under these Ordinances should bo exercised by the Bench until the Act came into full operation.—Mr Watt: I would draw your attention before sitting down to section 23, which you have omitted. —Mr Karris : I do not see anything in it. It ip not a certificate under the Aot that persons are now applying for, but a new license.--Mr Watt j But, if you read the sections together.---Mr Harris: Certificates cannot be - granted till April next, therefore there can be no conflict between the Ordinance and the Act.—Mr Harris also appeared to support the application of Joseph R. Miffs, for the National (late Ayrshire) Hotel; for Alexander Mufr, for the Old England Hotel ; and for Michael Boiland, for the Eagle Hotel. Mr Haggitt, for Mr William Sheddcn, applied for a license for the Cattle Market Hotel, on the Kaikorai Hill, and produced a memorial signed by sixty residents, and another by forty cattle salesmen and butchers, whose business required their presence in the neighborhood--hotii in favor of the application. He urged most strongly that either their Worships were sitting under the Provincial Ordinance, or had no right to sit at all. The Act of 1573 was not in force at all. In the first instance it was necessary, in order to bring it into operation, for the Governor to proclaim districts, which had not been done. Mr Watt seemed to think that section (5 of the Act was an unanswerable argument against the granting of new licenses. If the Bench held so they would have to go much further—to the extent of holding that the Legislature intended to stop the sale of alcoholic liquor altogether, and )iy ffid not think they would come to that conclusion. Jf they did, the consequences would he serious, hoeaus.e not only publicans, hut the holders of wholesale licenses, bottle licenses, and brewers would lie prevented from sidling alcoholic liquors. Air Watt; The action of the Bench does not stop the Government issu}nghrcwers’and publicans’ licenses under] our Ordinance : they merely pay the money, produce the licenses, and get them endorsed. Air Haggitt : The only question that arises is whether there is any conflict between the (Ith section of the Act and the corresponding - one of the Provincial Ordinance, and I say there is none. Air E. Cook, for Airs Hannah Noonan, applied for a license for a house situated at Mornington, and handed in a memorial signed by thirty residents. To stop tfie issue of licenses would be an act of confiscation. There was no appeal from their Worships’ decision, but a writ of prohibition could be applied for to the Supreme ('ourt by anyone who desired to make an exhibition of his conscience, and was prepared to bear the cost,--Mr Stewart: I have been requested to address the Bench upon .—Mr Watt: Do you appear to object to any particular license.- - Air Stewart; No, but wc object to all the licenses. 1 know I am not untitled to bo heard, but my remarks will not occupy more than two or three minutes. Counsel having objected to Air Stewart being heard, the learned gentleman sat down.—Air Harris : 'flijfc being a matter <?f very considerable im-

portance, not only to the publicans, but to the public generally, I would suggest that the applications be adjourned for further consideration say for a fortnight; and that in the meantime the Bench take the opportunity of ascertaining the opinion of the Attorncy(lcneral upon the point raised. I feel sure the Government will place the services of the At-torney-General in a matter of this kind at the comma n< lof the Beach. This is a question arising outof the ambiguity of a statute, probably prepared by the Attorney-General himself. (Mr Haggitt: “No.”) 1 should be very sorry to think it was, but wc have a right to assume such was the case. lam sure he would give an opinion for the guidance of the Bench. -Mr Watt: We agree to Mr Hatris’s suggestion, .and adjourn the cases for a fortnight to give the Executive, if they think tit, an opportunity of making application to the Attorney-General. Sneaking for myself, I think it must be hold that the Act is in force with respect to two-thirds of the population and to new licenses. I cannot get over that. There can lie no confiscation, as no rights, have accrued in respect of new licenses. -Mr Haggitt; No rights are preserved. Mr Watt : As I have already said, we agree to grant the adjournment ; at the same time wc have modified our first expressed opinion to the extent of saying that probably and most likely you were correct that wc have no authority to transfer licenses or do anything else.—The business was accordingly adjourned for a fortnight.

POUT CHALMERS.— December 2,

(Before Dr. Drysdale, J.P.) The application for licenses were from Mr William Kettle, for a transfer of a license trora his present store to his new premises ; and from Mr I aiwjence, for n general license for the Railway Hotel. Mr Mansford appeared for the latter ease. As there was not a quorum the Bench decided to refer the matter to his Honor the Superintendent and the Provincial Executive. _