The Manawatu Standard (PUBLISHED DAILY) The Oldest Daily Newspaper on the West Coast. TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1884. THE LICENSING ACT.

Manawatu Standard, Volume IV, Issue 153, 27 May 1884, Page 2

The Manawatru Standard (PUBLISHED DAILY) The Oldest Daily Newspaper on the West Coast. TUESDAY, MAY 27, 1884. THE LICENSING ACT.

There is one measure on the Statute Book that urgently requires revision. It is the present Licensing Act. It has proved to be unworkable, and is capable of being made very oppressive in its operation both on the public and the licensed victuallers. It in sincerely to be hoped that before long many of its more objectionable provisions may be eliminated, by which it will become both more useful and also what is of almost equal importance, more popular. As cases in point illustrative of the " peculiarities " of the present Act, we may cite the following : — A Dunedin publican was summoned for unnecessary delay in admitting the police, who after knocking at the door, in response to the enquiry, "Who's there?" said, "Police. Please let us in, Mr Hayes." Do. fendant's counsel nubmitted that the information must fail. Sections 184 and 185. of our Licensing Act were a reprint of the English Act, with the exception that our Lgislature had inserted the words " without any unnecessary delay." Under the English Act the offence was for failing to admit the constable meiely. Before an hoielkeeper could be brought within the meaning of our Act must be proved that the police demanded an entrance uin pursuance of this section of the Act." Counsel intimated that he relied on this point, and would call no evidence. The Courb took till the afternoon to consider the point raised, and Mr Cahkw then delivered the following decision :—• " We

think the demand for admittance was no; suilicient. The Act makes it sui offence to fail to admit, without unnecessary delay, any constable in the execution of his duty demanding to enter in pursuance of a certain section of the Act. The section named is clearly not the oue intended, but that arises through an error in dividing section 16 of the English Act iuto two sections — 184 and 185 of the New Zealand Act — without altering the words * this section ' to the words * preceding section, 1 and we must read section 18) with the interpretation. We think these words ' demanding 1 to enter in pursuance of this section ' inquire that the constable should intimate by sufficient words that he demands to enter for the purpose of preventing or detecting the the violation of the provisions of the Licensing Act. We cannot see why a simple demand for admission should not have been made sufficient, but the Act seems to require more, and thus affords a loophole for escape." The case was dismissed. That is one. Here is another of the " incongruities," with which the Act abounds : — A Wellington publican was prosecuted for having sold spirits which were adulterated with water. The sample purchased by the police, and stated at the time of purchase to be for put poses of analysis, was found to be pure in so far as any admixture of deleterious ingredients was concerned ; but it was not of proper strength, 'i he plea set up by counsel for the defence was ihat the accused had complied with the statute by placing printed cards in the bar notifying to the public the adulteration of her liquors with water, and that therefore the Court could not impose a penalty. His Worship said that he considered that as the purchaser (Sergeant O'Donovan) had had no knowledge of the fact that the spirits were adulterated, although the defence was that there were cards in the bar, the accused must be hold guilty of a breach of the law. A technical breach, however, had only been committed, aud this fact would cause him to reduce the penalty he vas about to impose. In inflicting a fine of 20s and costs, Mr W.midbll remarked that the licensee of the hotel had done wrong in making such a rash and reckless reduction iu the strength of the gin as 48.45 per cent, below the standard. The Court further ordered the police to place a card in the bar of the hotel notifying that the licensee had been convicted of adulteration, and also instructed the Clerk of the Court to endorse the conviction on the license. Oa the application of Mr Shaw, who said that the licensed victuallers of the colony had boon advised that the mere placing of printed cards in a bar was sufficient compliance with the Act, leave was given to appeal against the decision of the Court. Now, surely au Act which enforces such irreconcilable procedure should be repealed without loss ot time. It really does not say much for the ititel licence of the Legislative which framed and passed such an oppressive measure. If spirits are never adulterated with mure injurious substances than pure water, it would be well for the community at large. Unfortunately, the sober truth and facts are very different, and in many places poison under the the name of various brands of spirituous liquors is retailed to the public without, the law taking cognizance of or interfering. To brand a publican in this way, for what should be considered the most venial offence, is surely an act of cruelty and injustice that proper legislation should never sauctiou, much less endorse or make compulsory on the part of those who administer the Act.