HOTEL LODGERS' RIGHTS.

Auckland Star, Volume L, Issue 134, 6 June 1919, Page 6

HOTEL LODGERS' RIGHTS.

AND THE WAR REGUIATIOICS. I NO DRINK OX TROOPSHIP DAYS A decision of some considerable in terest to hotelkeepers was <nven by M ' J. E. Wilson, S.M., to-day,° when h found that when hotels are closed unde the war regulations, by military rermjgi tion, it is unlawful for hotelkeepere to supply liquor to boarders. ■ The decision was a considered one in thp case Police v. John Endean, heard' o May 28, when the defendant was charged that on March 9, a day when a troopshin arrived and the hotels were closed by requisition, he sold drink, exposed drink for sale, and kept his premises (Waitemata Hotel) open for the sale of drink i His Worship stated that the cireinn! stances were that on the date in tion the ordinary bar,, of the hotel wen closed, but when the police visited the place they found a room upstairs bein» used as a private bar, where there were a number of people who were alleged to be boarders. His .Worship was satisfied from the evidence that the majority of the people in the room were lodgers, and that the one or two others there had mt there innocently. Defendant did not deny the sale of liquor to lodgers,' anl contended that he was within "his'legjj right* in selling to lodgers, notwjth! standing the war regulations. The question, continued his Woishin. was whether or not war regulation! absolutely prohibited the sale and con. sumption of liquor during the hours the hotels were directed to be closed, notwithstanding section 191 of the Licensiu? Act, which permitted licensees to sell t* boarders during closed hour-;. He had come to the conclusion that the prohibition was an absolute one, and that while the order issued under the war regulj. tions was in force it was an offence for t i licensee to sell to anyone, whether boarder or only an ordinary member of ; the public. A number of cases had been decided in the English and Scotteh Courts under the Defence of the Bealm Act, and decisions had been given to the ellect that prohibitions under that Act were absolute, and abrogated concession allowed under the Licensing Act; The decisions given made it clear that war regulations might be made which -were utterly inconsistent with existing regafe. tions, and utterly repugnant to the conditione of the Licensing Act. The w B relations gave power to make a ramisition for the control of any business, and to control a business already controlled by the Licensing Act; the language o! the regulations in this matter followed section 190 of the Licensing Act, practically incorporating that section in the regulations, yet section 191 was not spedcally incorporated, while in a case where an exception to a prohibition was jatended that exception was definitely stated, as in clause 12 relating to "treating. -, '"I think," concluded his Worship,-"H ■wa s intended to effect a complete prohibition of the sale, exposure, and consumption of liquor. If not, the very inkchief it was intended to prevent "would be bound to occur. In this particular case- soldiers Avho had just come backflai booked rooms in the hotel, and if the defence Here correct these men would be entitled to be served while the man o» the street was not entitled to get drint I have no doubt in my own mind that such was not the intention of the rerifc. tions. Defendant will be convicted o/Bj sale and exposure of liquor, and Sad £2 and costs. The charge of keeping*!, premises open for the sale of liquoriiffl be dismissed. a« I am satisfied he considered himself entitled to sell ta boarders.'"