Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
This article displays in one automatically-generated column. View the full page to see article in its original form.

The Chalmers Licensing Case.

THE LICENSED VICTUALLERS' APPEAL.

United Press Association—By Electric Telegraph. Dunedin, May 16 The decision of the Privy Council in the Chalmers appeal case was received by iMr Platts, solicitor, Port Chalmers. When the petition was lodged by the trade alleging irregularities in the conduct of the licensing poll taken'in December, 1902, Mr A. S. Adams, counsel for the prohibition party, objected that Mr C. O. Graham, H.M., not being Magistrate of the Port Chalmers Court, had no jurisdiction to hold the inquiry, maintaining that the late Mr Carew was the Magistrate of the Court within the meaning of the Act. The point was argned by counsel, and after consideration Mr Jraham decided that he had the necessary legal qualification to hold an inquiry. Objection to Mr Graham's jurisdiction was not taken untj.l the time had j expired within which another Magistrate could have proceeded to hold the enquiry. Application was then made on behalf of the prohibition party to the Supreme Court for a writ to prohibit Mr Graham from peoceeding further in the matter. The Supreme Court gianted the writ, but an appeal was made against the Supreme Court's decision to the Court of Appeal of New Zealand. By three Judges (the Chief Justice and Justices Conolly and Cooper) to two (Mr Justice Edwards and Mr Justice Denniston) the Court confirmed j the decision of Mr Justice Williams, that j Mr Carew and not Mr Graham should have held the inquiry. Application for leave to appeal to the Privy Council was refused. It was then decided to petition the King in Council for leave to appeal to the Privy Council. Ths petition was presented, and leave to appeal to ihe highest Court of the realm was granted. The final appeal in the name of William Henry Bastings v, iJohn Mitchell Callaghan was heard before the Privy Council in London just before Easter. The Sight Hon. E. B. Haldaue, K.C., appeared for tUe appellant. Defendant was not represented The appeal was successful. The effect of tbe decision is to reverse the decisions of the Supreme Court and Cour: of Appeal of New Zealand, and Mr Graham's reading of the Act is confirmed. The result of fhe judgment is that Mr Graham, as Stipendiary Magistrate of Chalmers, is entit ed to hear the petition and give his decision as to whether the irregularities in the conduct of the election were such as to invalidate the poll. If he finds them to have been so, then the Chalmers hotslkeepers will be entitled to get their licenses, ff not, the verdict of the Privy Council will be of no avail to them.

This article text was automatically generated and may include errors. View the full page to see article in its original form.
Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/AG19050516.2.26

Bibliographic details

The Chalmers Licensing Case., Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXII, Issue 6571, 16 May 1905

Word Count
443

The Chalmers Licensing Case. Ashburton Guardian, Volume XXII, Issue 6571, 16 May 1905

Working