CITY LICENSING ELECTION

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18806, 8 March 1923, Page 5

CITY LICENSING ELECTION

WHY IS THEBE A CONTEST? Mr H. S. Adams, representing tho United Temperance Reform Council, describes aa follows, from its point of view, tho negotiations with reference to the composition of the Dunedin City Licensing Committee for the ensuing year: The negotiations this year have boon made through Mr Douglas, Mayor of tho city, from whom tho prohibitionists received an offer by the other sido to accept two seats on the commit tee, tho prohibitionists taking the other three. This was accepted, and I have a telegram which 1 enclose which reads as follows; —"Speight advises agreeable your proposal three temperance, two moderates for Dunedin city.—(Signed) Douglas, Mayor. • , • .V, i 1 Ihe arrangement contained in the telegram is, I am informed, no more than tho carrying out of a promise given three years ago, when the “trade” took three seats and tho prohibitionists two. It was then agreed that if prohibition secured a majority of votes in tho city at last poll tho position of tho parties would be reversed on the nest committee. Following this up, the “trade nominated Messrs Ritohio and Carroll and the prohibitionists Messrs King, Hilliker. and Nichol. Last Saturday morning, however, Mr Percy Wren secured his own nomination, and, in spite of efforts made by both parties to induce him to stand down, ho insists on contesting the election. His father, Mr James Wren, occupied a seat on the outgoing committee as a representative of tho “trade.” but that appears a very inadequate reason for putting the city to the expense and inconvenience of an election. It is difficult to understand in what interest his nomination is required when tho parties who ’appear to bo chiefly, if not solely, concerned havo concluded thoir own arrangements. The division of the scats on the committee in the proportion of throe to two represents as accurate a division as is possible in proportion to the voting strength of the parties, so that the arrangement appears to be quite a fair one so far aa the public is concerned. Mr Wren’s action has placed both parties in a false position. The prohibitionists, having secured an agreement with tho “trade” representatives to have a majority of seats on tho committee, find that agreement of no value, and must contest an election in which they can gain no, more than the concession already agreed on. The “trade” representatives, on the other hand, are put ip. «he position of being unable to carry out their engagement. It is clear, however, that the “trade” stands to gain from the contest more seats than it has agreed to accept, and under tho circumstances it would not be asking too much That it should now arrange with its own nominees that the first agreement should be carried out.