APPEAL COURT.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LII, Issue 217, 19 October 1909, Page 3

APPEAL COURT.

INTERESTING LICENSING CASE. By Telegraph.—Press Association. Wellington, October 18. The Court of Appeal is hearing the case Sarah Mulhera v. the Ashburtoi Licensing Committee and G. H. Mann, an objector to a renewal. It is a motion for mandamus removed by consent ro the Appeal Court. Plaintiff was the licensee of a hotel in a portion of the Geraidine district, whicli was included at the last election in the Ashburton electorate. Restoration was not carried., ar.d when plaintiff applied for a renewal of the license it was refused on the ground that the committee had no jurisdiction.

Mr. Hosking, K.C., appeared for the plaintiff and Mr. Adams for the defendants. The former contended that in the Newtown case the Privy Council had decided that no license should be taken away until the voters had so decided. In this cose no proposal was carried, and therefore the last valid poll—naiii'ly, that in the old Geraldoe district, remained in force. That po'l did not prohibit the granting of licenses and the committee therefore had jurisdiction to grant a renewal. Wellington, Last Night. Continuing his" argument in the ap- ( peal case, Mr. Hosking said that under Section 10: i every license had the 'iV solute r«ht of renewal, not for three years, but for an indefinite time, subject to the licensing polls and the discretionary powers of the committe:. Every valid poll had effect till superseded liv a subsequent valid poll. Mr. Adams contended that the words in section 8c of the Licensing Act were absolutely "clear, and to give effect li the argument of plaintiff the Court mus't, strike the proviso to that section cut Of the Statute, although it was put in titer the Newtown case expressly to jrreet such a case as this. At tliis stngc the Court stopped Mr. r Adarr-- id Mr. Hosking having briefly irepV"'" the Court unanimously dismiss--1 • t' ■ motion with costs on the midd'e «•• '• ; id as from a distance.

\ .Justice Williams said there was i.) doubt the law was harsh, and pos siblv nnexipceted, but it was' too clear for the Court to be able to avoid giving ing effect to it. Leave was granted tn appeal to tM Privy Council.