LICENSING COURT.

Grey River Argus, Volume XII, Issue 1049, 6 December 1871, Page 2

LICENSING COURT.

Tuesday, December 5. Present— W. H. Revell, Esq.,R.M., in the chair ; E. Wickes, Esq. , J.P. ; and R. j C. Reid, Esq., J,P. j The following applications for renewels were then heard :^- I Benjamin Gough, Masonic Hotel, Mawhera Quay. Mr Perkins applied for a renewal of the license in the name of Mr Cameron, late of the Union Hotel. Since the application Mr Gough had disposed of his interest in the hotel. The Chairman, in granting a renewal of the license to Mr Cameron, advised him to be careful in the conducting of his house. Charles Harvey Rhodes, Ferry Hotel, Mawhera Quay. The house was well reported on by the police. License renewed. Edward Bylund, Scandinavian Hotel; Richmond Quay. The police gave a good report] of the house, and the license was renewed. Edmund Stratford, United States Hotel, Gresspn and Johnston streets. — The house wanted repairing, but it was properly conducted. The Chairman drew the attention of Mi' Stratford to the report of the police ; and on the applicant stating that the house was being repaired, the license was renewed. - Daniel M'Kinty, Rose of Australia Hotel, Albert street. — The house was well reported upon. License renewed. Henry Hunt, Hunt's Club Hotel, Mawhera Quay.— Mr (guinness applied for a renewal, and the house being well reported upon, the application was granted. ...-,- Dennis' Buggy, Niagara Hotel, Johnston street. — License renewed. Relative to the last application, the Chairman, said it was not made in accordance with the provisions of .the. Act ; the Bench would look over tlie omission for that occasion, but no more licenses or renewals would be granted [unless the Act was stri6tly complied with. The. following applications for new licenses were then entertained.: — - ; [ George Frederick Cooper, Tivoli Hotel, Heroert street.— Application granted. Timothy Connelly, Diggers Arms, Tainui street. — Mr Guinness applied on behalf of Connelly, who was a miner residing at No Town. The application was granted. Barnard Gallagher, Supreme Court Hotel, Gresson street. —Mr Perkins, who appeared- on behalf ■ of ; the applicant, stated that he had been informed that the Police objected to the granting of the. license. If such was the case he should like to hear the objection read. The Chairman read the report of Mr SubInspector Hickson, from which it appeared that the Inspector objected to the license being granted, as he understood it was the intention of Gallagher to transfer it to a man named Quadri, whom he had known for six years as keeping a disreputable house in Hokitika. Mr Perkins stated that the applicant did not intend to transfer the license, and it was unreasonable to object to the granting of a license because a man should happen to be the brothur^in-law of somebody else. Barnard Gallagher was then examined, and, stated that Quadri had no interest in the present

application. He was his brottier-inrlaw, but neither Quadri or his wife would have any part in the conducting of the house. Quadri was in gaol, and Quadras wife had never lived in the house he proposed to open. Mrs Quadri came backwards and fonvarJs sometimes. She lived at Doherty's. He had made up his n'ind to tak erfche house, bjf ore .Quadj;i ..caine. .fcq, Greymoutn. He nad never received any money from, Quadri 'oh; account of the house,' nor had he promised to pay the , license-fee for him. ,JVIr, Hickson^tated* that he had ngtlung r tQ.say against the applicant, whom h'e ? ~oelieved to be a very respectable miner, but he, was; given to understand that. Quadri would be, connected with the house,. and if either he or his" wife had anything to do with it, it would soon become a disreputable house. As he. had stated in his report, Quadri had kept a house in Hokitika which was worse than a common brothel. Mr Perkins contended that no grounds had been shown for refusing the application. It had proved that Mrs Quadri had never lived in the house or had any connection with it. The Bench decided on refusing the application. ..... .., . Alexander, Great Western Hotel, Gresson street. — Mr Perkins appeared for the applicant, ' and Mr Newton appeared on behalf of Thomas Bailey, Full and Plenty Hotel. Mr Newton raised a preliminary objection that the Bench had no power to grant the. application, as Alexander had not complied with the provisions of the Act,, and the 16th section of the Act rendered it imperative that all the provisions should be complied: with. ■ Shoxild the Bench, however, waive the objection, he would urge that' the house was not required. It was next door to a licensed house, and that the conduct of the applicant was very immoral. Mr Perkins urged that the Bench had decided upon waiving such technical objections alluded to by Mr Newton. The applicant and Bailey were rival restaurant-keepers, and a (license was necessary to enable him to carry on his business. Mr Newton again contended that the Bench had no power to set aside the 16th section of the Act. The Chairman stated that the Bench considered the objection fatal, and declined to entertain the application. . The t/hairman stated that for the future the Bench would not entertain any. applications unless the applicants attended in person. '), , ; \ The Gourt then adjourned.