PUKEKURA. PUKEKURA.

Waikato Times, Volume XVIII, Issue 1549, 8 June 1882, Page 2

PUKEKURA. PUKEKURA.

Mr Madigan's License Refused. The first quarterly meeting of the above Licensing Bench was held at the Cambridge West school-room at noon on Saturday last ; Mr J. Fisher in the chair. There was a full attendance of commissioners. An application of W. F. Madigan for a license for an hotel at Cambridge West was laid before the bencli, and the report of the Inspector of Police on the premises and the character of the applicant was read by the clerk and also submitted. The clerk also produced a petition bearing the signatures of about forty ratepayers and householders, which piayed that the application of Mr Ma,digan should not be granted. Mr T. Gresham appeared in support of the application. In doing so he would state the circumstances under which the application was made, and which might or might not be within the knowledge of the bench. Some time ago Mr Madigan applied for a license to the then licensing bench sitting at Te Awamutu. and on that occasion almost the whole of the legal bar in Waikato, including himself, were retained to oppose the application. The application was then refused on the grounds that the opening of a licensed house in Cambridge West was premature, there being no necessity whatever to warrant it. At that time the chairman of the bench asked the applicant whether or not there were two arfcaircases — an inner and an outer — attached to the house ; and it was shown by the plan that there was only one, an inner one. Since that time the requisite staircase was erected, so that nothing which the act required might remain undone. The second application was made in March, 1881, and was again refused, as there was still no necessity for a license. At the next application the Bench declined to deal with the question, on the ground that the Pukekura district having been gazetted under the new Licensing Act they would not interfere in the matter. Mr Madigan made his fourth application in December last. The majority of the Bench were then in favour of the application being granted, but in view of the Licensing Act, 1881, coming into force they declined to deal with the matter. Ho would now proceed to urge the case on its merits to the Bench then sitting. The present act puts it in the hands of the ratepayers within a certain prescribed licensing .district, to say whether the number of licenses in that district for the sale of spirituous liquors should or should uot be increased. The.poll of ratepayers' had been taken, and by that it was decided by a majority of 3 to 1^ that the number of licenses should be increased. Having in view the fact that this was the only, house they could have had in contemplation at the time, he submitted that it was in respect of Mr Madigan's house and no other, that the ratepayers were strongly in iavonr of an increase of licenses. ' As to the police report laid before the Bench, no better .certificate could possibly be obtained in reference to the condition of the house, and its fitness for affording accommodation, and the character'and' fitness of the v proprietor, Mr Madigan himself. As regards the petition of oppositionists which had been brought forward, hardly thought it necessary to say anything in reference to it, as it had not been brought forward in time, section 58, of the present act, distinctly laid, down that though it was.quite within t'ne province. of ten r 6V more adult resident ratepayers' Competition against the granting of a license, still, sych petition .or objection sKquld t Be'' lodged, 'witli, the clerk pofjttie' Com^nittiee' v hot lafer^than Tevefr'cleV^ys beforVtlW^day Itppoin-. 'ted f or-iihe ' Kearingv^oi the ? application! The notice Bf 'oßjectiori*in-thii case;' ho>: /ever;? was not" lodged^n'Me' clerkfdf : thtteM^e<unSi ?^aturaay^ , fogsfcJL - oi^ay^andithel'Jas'tVdayit. kccor^iSg^to*

ever, 'within the ] power of any resident' ratepayer to come there and objectMn person to the granting of the license, without any notice whatever being given of his intention. The 52nd section of the act requires that the appli- ~ cant shall be of good character, that he is not a dissolute man, or a man given to drunkenness, and that he has never been previously convicted of selling liquor without a license ; that the house for which he seeks a license shall be in good repair, and affording the necessary accomodation as prescribed in the act ; that it has not been shown by the vote of the majority of the i"atepayera that an increase of licenses was unnecessary, and that the premises were not situated too near to a place of public worship. The report of the police inspector was sufficiently satisfactory as regards these matters. The house was not near a place of worship, and, as to the. necessity of the license, he would refer the Bench to the poll of the ratepayers, which was ample to show that the granting of the application then before the Court was a desideratum. In case of the application being refused, they were doubtless aware that twelve months must elapse before Mr Madigan could renew his application. In conclusion, he contended that no cause existed to show why the license should not be granted, and in acceding to the application the gentlemen who occupied the Bench would feel convinced in their own minds that they were only carrying out the wishes of the district as expressed by the vote of the people. By section 67, of the act, they would see, that in ease of refusal, the Bench was required to make known the objection necessitating a xefusal. The Bench having retired for about fifteen minutes, the chairman (Mr Fisher) said, " The Licensing Committee have refused the license on the ground that it | is not wanted in the district, this being the opinion of the majority of "the Committee." This was all the business.