REFUSED

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1166, 29 June 1911, Page 10

REFUSED

DECISION OF LICENSING BENCH. COUUTEXAY PLACE SHOP. ' Schuliz's shop, in Comtcnay Place, formed the last act in the annual meeting of the Wellington Licensing Committee yesterday (Ihe fourth silting), when the chairman (Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.), announcetl that the committee "we-ro unanimous lo refuse the renewal of the wholesale license Ifehl by A. 13. Schultz." "This," added .Dr. M'Arthur, "is an application for the renewal of a wholesale license, which is opposed by (he police on grounds as follow:— "The holder has contravened the terms of his license, inasmuch as lie has sold quantities of liquor of less lhan two gallons at one time to one person. "He has sold large quantities of liquor to a person, who has been twice convicted of selling without a license, and has no entry in his hooks as to whom these large quantities have been sold. In his entry he simply states 'to cash,' and refuses (or i's unable) to give particulars. "Mr. Jellicoe hail been present for the licensee, and lie had quoted authorities, with a view to showing that the committee had no jurisdiction to refuse renewal on the evidence given. The first authority quoted was Section SO of the Licensing Act, 190S, but the committee were of opinion that this was confirmatory of the contention of the police. Moreover, the committee had expressed itself as satisfied that the so-called sales of liquor of two gallons (in which two bottles were taken away) were not bona fide sales of two gallons, and, on this objection, the contention of the police would be upheld.

"As to thn second objection," said Dr. jl'Arthur, "the committee is satisfied that the licensee knew quite well that the liquor (sent out in December last, and entered as "cash") was dispatched to one Britis, since convicted on two occasions for selling liquor without a license. This the committee holds to be a substantial reason why the license should not l;e renewed." "Referring to Mr. Jellicoe's authorities, tho chairman went on to saythat Norwood v. Stewart had nothing whatever to do with the matter in hand, and (even assuming that it had) it was against the licensee.

Also, as regarded a case M'Kenzio v. Ho.™ that only settled the point that wholesale licenses were not within the provisions of Section 14 of the Alcoholic Liquors Sale Control Act, 1833. "But," added the chairma;., "nobody was ever so foolish as to say that they were." After dealing with the other cases quoted by Mr. Jellieoe, his "Worship said thai the committee desired to draw attention to the definition of "license" and "licensee" in Section i of the Licensing Act, 1908, as follows :— "License means any license- for the sale of liquor granted under this Act, and 'licensed person' or •licensee' means a person holding any 'license under this Act." And further they drew attention to Section V 2 (1), which reads thus: "Notwithstanding anything in this Act, tho Licensing Committee may of its own, motion take notice of any matter or thing which in ils opinion would bo an objection to tho granting of a licence, although no notice of objection has been given as by ibis Act is provided." In this case due notice had been given to the licensee. The committee therefore refused to renew the license for the reasons stated, which may be shortly summarised as follow :— ITo sold quantities of liquor Jess than two gallons at one- time to one person. He supplied liquor in large quantities to a person convicted of selling liquor I without a license, and kept no record, by name, of these sales. Mr! Dix asked if the committee would grant Schult/. on extension; say, for a fortnight. He had ,£7OO worth of stock to dispose of, and it was not an easy matter to get rid oi that in a couple of days. Moreover; he was not a young man who could face the world ami undertake any kind of work. He (Mr. Dix) took it that the committee did not wish to penalise Schultz sa as to cause him the loss of th* capilal which ho had invested. Tho chairman replied that he did not think that any grace ought to be given to Schultz beyond Juno 30. Ho had practically carried on his trade in defiance of the police. Subsequently tie committee retired for a few minutes to consider the position, and when they returned tho chairman announced that ihey were of tho samo opinion—that the license should expire on June 30. In answer to a question from Mr. Dix, the chairman replied that the committee were unanimous on the matter.