Untitled

Feilding Star, Volume XIII, Issue 151, 18 June 1892, Page 2

Conceunixo the administration of the Licensing Act, which has been referred to as a confused and puzzling statute, the following extract from a iudgment given by Mr Justice Richmond, in the case of Hamilton v. Fraser, will prove of deep interest : 1 —"It is no doubt true that the Licensing Committee is not a Criminal Court, but it is a Court of Justice, ' bound to hear both Bidos, to proceed upon sworn testimony, and to give opportunity for answering charges which in some cases are offences against the law, and in others ac--3 cusations deeply affecting public ' character. It is also a Court which, i ttiougli noc empowered to BiifrjecG • penalties in the technical sense, yet » can declare virtual forfeitures which ' may involve the loss of large sums of ' money, and even the absolute ruiu of ' the licensees aud owners. It is, there- ! fore, a {tribunal which ought to pro- , ceed with the utmost cautiou and dis- , cretion. It is to be hoped that those who have the. execution, of this ls w

will realise the difficulty and delicacy of their position, and give as little occasion as possible for just complaint. It is certain that the cause of temperance, holy though it be, cannot be advanced by disregard to the still more sacred claims of justice." In a recent issue we published a summary of the business done by the Government Life Insurance Department for the year 1891. The figures then quoted showed to a demonstration how admirably the business of the department is conducted, how the old policy holders are retained on the list of insurers, and how new business is attracted. Since then an instauce of the kindly consideration of the department was shown in thecaseofthe family of the unfortunate Mr Anderson who was accidentally killed on the Manawatu Railway Company but a few i days ago. The officers of the depart- ' ment did not wait until the unfortunate widow, or friends on her behalf, importuned them for monetary aid, but they afc once made it known, that although the policy had been allowed to lapse by the failure of the insured to continue the payment of premiums the Insurance Department still held itself liable because the " surrender value " of the policy had been used for that purpose and the policy was therefore, if at the time of the death of Mr Anderson, of a money value which will be a boon to the bereayed widow. We feel assured that there are many other policies current in the same condition, and we hold that this fact speaks volumes for the excellence of the New Zealand Life Insurance Department.