The Wairarapa Daily Times. [Established 1874.] MONDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1895. MASTERTON HOTELS.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XVI, Issue 5202, 9 December 1895, Page 2

The Wairarapa Daily Times. [Established 1874.] MONDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1895. MASTERTON HOTELS.

Tin: following temperate article on Maslerton Hotels is published in the last issue of out' local contemporary, and we quite approve of very much that is expressed in it

It is to lie regretted that Mr C. E. Daniell, a gentleman who professes to liavo tho welfare ol the town at heart, and whoso dealings in public are usually fair and square, should have allowed himself to make the suggestions ho did at tho meeting of the Mastcrton Licensing Bench on Friday. We feel sure that tho effect of the questions put to the police by Mr Daniell, hail not been considered. They all led up to the issue, were the police conniving with publicans to iguoro the Licensing Act ? The question has been previously asked in public, aud tho answer will bo given in due course. The whole of Mr Darnell's questions appeared to be an introduction to the question, " Had the police been drinking in tho hotels iu wrong hours?' 1 Such a question as this, would have been justified, had the person asking it, been in possession ol evidence to support tho proposition that tho police had committed themselves, And even then, it wus only tho bearing such a proposition would have upon the conduct of licensed houses. that affected the Licensing Bench, But as it happened, Mr Daniell was merely asking questions on hearsay, He had not a little of evidence to support the inference conveyed by the questions, or he would surely have brought it forward. The Chairman and members of the Bench were perfectly consistent when they urged that (lie persons who prompted the questions, should havo been present to substantiate them. As it is, no specific cliargo has been made against police or publicans, and neither are therefore afforded an opportunity of defending themselves. The questions asked, however, cast a reflection upon both parties, a rotation which, under tho circumstances, is littlo abort of a stab in the dark, We are sorry that Mr Daniell should have allowed himself to become the tho tool of persons who arc evidently afraid to faco the music. It young men have been gambling in hotels after hours, by the knowledge and consent of the polico; if tho police havo been winking at breaches ol tho Act; and if thoy themselves havo been drinking in wrong hours, a deplorable stato of things must exist. The mere suggestion of such a thing, is sufficient to create alarm. Uiilosb Mr Dauioll is prepared to lay an information in tho matter, ho should accept tho denial of.tho police and-express regret that ho should have asked such annoying questions on information which is unreliable.

It is quite obvious that a reflection has been cast upon both police and publicans, and that the matter cannot bo allowed to rest at its present stage. There are, however, two allegations nmdo by our local contemporary that are evidently puro assumptions. One is tliafc Mr Daniell lias" allowed himself to becopie the tool of persons who aro evidontly afraid to face the music," The other is that Mr Daniel! was "merely asking questions on hearsay." There is no evidence to support either of these contentions, and the assertion of them as facts is the weak point of an othonvise fair article. If Mr Daniell has been misled in this affair, lie is manly enough —and wo believe even our local contemporary willadinitthis—tofrankly admit his mistako and to accept the denial of the police. If oil the other hand ho has not been misled, thou, as our contemporary vory properly points out "a very deplorable state of things must exist," and the sooner I it is remedied the better. The position taken up by Mr Daniell at the licensing Meetingwas obviously that a deplorable state of tiling did exist, but he wan not prepared on that o'ceasion to produce' his witnesses. The public as well as the police and the publican havoa right to kiiriw View tlie reflection cast is jfotwdid

or unfounded, and wo scarcely think that Mr Daniell is fclio man to dis- ' appoint them. The proper courso whom the law is brokou is to report : the offence to the police, and for the police to take action, but a difficulty arises if tho police have committed an impropriety themselves. Does our contemporary seriously suggest that Mr Daniell should ask a constable to lay an information against himself ? Would it not be better if the police, finding mi aspersion cast upon them, demanded an inquiry ? Tho police can obtain this without difficulty and really an inquiry is just what the public want, but perhaps the police and the Govornmont don't want one and this is to be regretted. Our contemporary talks about " facing the music," but oven the bold Scddon dare not face When the Premier was told that eighty householders of Masterton declared his police to be inefficient, did he face the music ? He hnd not the courage to do this and | we ask our contemporary "is not this a deplorable state of things ?"