THE CLUTHA MUDDLE.

Clutha Leader, Volume XX, Issue 1039, 22 June 1894, Page 6

THE CLUTHA MUDDLE.

FURTHER MUDDLING

(New Zealand Times. )

The third section of (he 13th clause of the Alcoholic Liquors Sale Act provides that the result of the prohibition poll shall be notified to the committee, and 11 thereafter, except as provided in section 5, no license shall be granted in the district until after another poll of electors has been taken therein." Section 5 will be found, on reference, to be a provision for giving the Governor power, on being petitioned by 100 residents, to enable the committee of any district of which any portion (riding or road district) had had its population suddenly increased in a large degree to grant new licenses. But the passing of a prohibition rote is nn absolute bar against the Governor's granting the power. Consequently the sole function of the licensing committee in districts which have voted prohibition us tc receive the returning officer's natification that the district has so voted. Beyond that the committee have absolutely nothing to do from the date of the expiry of the current licenses. They cannot grant licenses and they cannot regulate the liquor traffic, for there is no traffic to regulate.

Mr Hawkins, S.M. , thinking he sees more in the Act, has convinced himself that it would be criminal to hide his discovery under a bushel. He told the committee that in refusing licenses they must act judicially. But ihe committee said they would grant none, lalung up an impregnable position under the third section of the eighteenth clause. They are simply ordeted not to grant any licenses whatever. Nothing can be clearer than that, surely. Naturally, the applicants for renewals determined not to apply. Thereupon Mr Hawkins determined to hear the applications himself, and wait for the decision of a superior court.* In the meantime he makes a wild attack on the eleventh clause, which provides that pledges at elections do not disqualify members of licensing committees from sitting. In the attitude of tbe committee, which he regards as the effect of bias, when it is literal and proper obedience to the law, Mr Hawkins sees a grave danger to the electoral principle as applied to the judiciary. Mr Hawkins may make his mind perfectly easy ; nobody wants to make judges and magistrates elective. The experience of the United States has shown the evils of that system quite too forcibly. Bnt what has all that to do with .the matter in hand 1 What connection is there between a committeee which obeys the electors whose votes it is ordered to obey and a. magistracy which obeys the electors whom it has under the law to

obey in no way whatsoever ? Mr Hawkins seems to talk absolute nonsense, and nonsense is a thing which it is decidedly not criminal to abstain from. The only thing clear is that if Mr Hawkins granls any licenses in the teeth of the prohibition vote he will be liable to a fine of LSO foi- each, and everyone who takes such a license will be liable to all the penalties by which the Licensing Act keeps people from selling drink without a license.