Licensing Applications.

Patea Mail, 7 June 1882, Page 3

Licensing Applications.

NEW HOTEL LICENSE

The annual sitting of the Licensing Committee was held yesterday. Present, Messrs Currie (Chairman), Dixon, Potto, Black, and Howitt. George Beamish applied, through Mr Barton, for a publican’s license to a new house at the corner of York-strect, near he Patea bridge. No advocate appeared in opposition.

Mr Barton said the house is suitable for the purpose ; that stabling will be added if the Bench order that addition. As to the necessity for a house in that situation he urged that the passenger traffic of steamers requires a house near the wharves, it being inconvenient for travellers to go up the town to a hotel when they might stop at a house near the wharf until the coach passed to take them north or south. Every port in the colony had one or more hotels near the wharves. The applicant would be a lunatic to pay £4O a year for a liquor license unless he believed there would be enough trade to support his house. COMPLAINT AGAINST the * MAIL.’ Mr Barton also said : There is another matter of considerable importance to the due administration of justice in this town. He quoted public letters which have appeared in the Mail as to the propriety of granting this license, and said : This mode of discussing the application and its probable fate is utterly subversive of the due administration of justice; and if this Court had been a Court of Record, with power to commit for contempt, I should have applied to you lo commit the editor for contempt of Court. I cannot ask this Court for a committal, but I would ask the Court to express its 'strong disapprobation of the editor’s conduct in permitting these letters to be published. Another letter of May 17th said : “It was expected that when the new Licensing Committee w'as elected, they would be more independent than the old Licensing Magistrates, so that the public would be protected against personal influence being allowed to prevail on the bench. I hope this will he as we expected,” etcetera. Mr Barton said : I ask if that is not an utterly disgraceful and degrading statement, that this Court is swayed by personal motives, by which no other bench was previously swayed ? That is not all. On the 19th there is a repetition of the same slander in a letter headed “ More Public-houses.” That letter says : “ ‘ Moderation ’ seems to think that the owner has some influence with the new Licensing Committee, who would be inclined to favor him. Well, I have my own opinion on that, and as I see lawyers in Court are allowed to bet a now hat, I dare bet a tile that the Committee will not refuse this license.” . Mr Barton remarked : That is a most indecent thing to appear in a newspaper claiming any respectability. It is holding out a threat to this Court that if this Court dares to do anything hostile to the writers of these letters, the Court will be held up as being swayed by a banker, and actuated by personal motives. All these letters are anonimous. No one has the courage to come out and make these digraceful statements. Another letter signed *• Householder ” said : “The new hotel is built by a banker, and most of us know that bankers have- a peculiar influence when they want anything done. Some members of the new Licensing Committee are not as free to act as they ought to be.” —I ask whether this is not an utterly disgraceful statement ? Last night, evidently with the intention of again intimidating the Bench, another anonymous letter appears. It makes an attack on a bank manager who is in no way connected except as owner of the building. These letters are written for the purpose of private malice against the owner of the land on which the building happens to be erected. They are attempting to deprive Mr Beamish of his license, and they are hurting the owner of the land by re-

during its value. I hope the Court will express its opinion on such letters. The next, thing we shall have will be comments on cases coming on in Court, stating that if the Magistrates give a decision for a particular person, they will have been actuated by private motives. If these things were written of the Supreme Court, these writers or the publisher of the paper would find themselves in gaol.

Sergt Donovan : The police have reported on this house, but I may add that there is no apparent necessity for it, as far as I can see at present. You cannot entertain the application to-day, further than to wait till the house is finished. The police could report again before the Ist of July. Chairman : Do you know anything against the applicant ? Sergeant : He is a fit and proper person to keep a hotel, and has kept one before. His character is good. There is nothing against him.

Mr Barton : Are there not one or more hotels near the shipping wharves in every town in the colonj 7 ? Sergeant: There is, but it is not always the hotels near a wharf that gets this kind of traffic. I think you should order a fire escape in shape of a rope ladder inside a window. There is one in the Albion Hotel, and one is required for the Central and Australasian Hotels.

George Beamish gave evidence as to t lie number of rooms, &c. There is no billiard room. There are 10 rooms for public purposes. lam prepared to erect stabling if the Bench think it necesary. Mr Barton : What are your reasons for thinking that this hotel is required for public convenience ?

Mr Beamish answered this and Other questions to the same effect as in his solicitor’s previous argument.

Chairman asked if there was sufficient means of egress in the case of fire. " Applicant: Yes. Chairman : Have you any idea of enlarging the house ? Applicant : Yes, if the Bench think it necessary. Chairman : The Bench do think it necessary that stabling should be erected. Applicant : The wood shed and urinal on the plan will be added. Mr Knott, architect, said the ground is sufficient for extending the building considerably. As to fire, there is but one stair, but it is broad and sufficient. Mr Mullen, of the Masonic Hotel (near the new house) came forward and said ; Could I speak to the Bench ? Chairman ; On what subject ?

Mr Mullen : In reference to this house.

Mr Barton : There is nothing before the Court to show that this person lives even in the neighborhood. Chairman : We cannot hear you.

Mr Mullen : As to the traffic at the wharves, everybody knows ray house is only two or three chains from it. I have got three times the amount of accommodation that this house has. Chairman; The case is closed. Wecannot take any statement now. Mr Mullen ; There is any amount of hotel accommodation in the neighborhood.