NEWTOWN LICENSING COMMITTEE.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume XXXXV, Issue 159, 9 July 1903, Page 2

NEWTOWN LICENSING COMMITTEE.

- APPLICATION FOR MANDAMUS. ' Per Press Association. ! Wellington, July 8. Applications for a mandamus against | the Newtown Licensing Committee ' were heard by the full Court to-day. Judge Williams alone was absent. Ail 1 the appHcat'ons were taken together, Messrs Skerre't, Levi, Morrison, and Young were retained for the af pl-ca 1 tions, and Meters Atkinson, and Adams 1 (of Duntdin) for the Licensing Committee. Mr Skerrafcfc prefaoad his address by stating that his application 1 practically resdved itself in'o a request for a mmdamus to compel the Committee to grant renewals. He proceeded to detail the f»cts, which are well knowr, and said the oAy ground for the refusal was the Oammttee's contention that they had no jurisdiction bfcvu'e the poll had been upset. He argued that if the Committee were right wbecev«;r a pall was sc-t a~ide in a new district, wha'evdr the result of th .t p >ll might have besn, the effect would be prohibition irremediably. This would »pply to every new distii't or every district whose boundaries w< re altered. Hj contended that section 3 was exhausted bo soon as the poll was taken ; that it was merely requ r red « poll was to be held; that the sec ioa is siitisfi:d if a determination is arrived at by voting, eV'in if afterwards upsaf; that the section must be su l <j«:t to the sections imposed by other provisions of the Sta'ute, fu.h as the default of the Returning Officer. -Mr Skerrett is now elaborating his argument. latbb. Mr Skerrett continuing argument in Newtown licensing case submitted it was section 4 of the Act of 1895, and not section 3 that ri quired a licensing poll to be taken, and under this a poll was not valid unless half the electors voted, and according to the oommit.'e* in such case prohibition must result 1 After an el ibo ate elimination of the va-ious Lic3nsing Act", couns 1 contended that a licensee his a sta'utary right to renewal subject only to c<rtain objec'iions mentioned in the Act of 1881, end to a valid prohibition j po'l; that licenses can only bj refused as the result of an adverse vote of the electors; that prolrbition must be carried by three-fit.hs maj irity of th' voters reco d 'd ; 'h a the only licenses , voided are those gr nted in opposition to tha determination arrived at by a valid pall; that there is no machinery for making pr.ihi 1 i'ion efL-c ive in ! such a case as tha present; that the 'committees must be elected, but ye' 'would hivfl no jurisdiction in like this if the contention of the Newtown O.nnmittee wore right that licenses cimot b3 re created, and that all provisions for the relief of tenants or landlords dtp nd upon the result of a poll, and therefore the constiuction Bet up by cth;.r side contradicted the whole scheme of the Act and learfs to tha greatest absurdity and injustice. Section 3 was only intended to have a temporary operation, and to apply to districts existing v;h?n it cttne into operation, but not to those afterwards formed or rl'ared. Soction 14 of the Act of 1895 covert/d 'he whole mitter, aud prelum d the fasting s'atn ff

things whore »lwie had boon no po'l or n'i poll. Ho fu:th;r argued fro:u the ( Electoral and other Acts that Ihensult of the committed conieotion must be , that under o?rtain ciicurastar.crs do li-

censes could ba granted for two years j throughout the colon}', al h tigh no , poll had been takau. Seo'ion 3 merely | required a pill ta be bald. j the questions msntlon°d io it coul! . not be sairaitt.i d at all, as wli ra it j was marely a qv st'on cf restoration of licensor, or iufreaso in consequence of increase in pop il i ion th.r-> hid been H determination, tu:d tho poll wu* no 1 : a nullity. T'l' U',<'i »ftm'wa'di it-ido tho r suit, ni'is' be tiv suno as who° n.> pt.ipo*al whs eairind. Mr 8k» rreti'd address was not con- ( dueled when the court rose, fl