LICENSING BENCH

Manawatu Times, Volume LXXVIII, Issue 12807, 3 June 1914, Page 7

LICENSING BENCH

At the annual meeting of Palmerston North Licensing Bench, Mr J. \Y. Povnton, S.M., presiding, there were present, Messrs Palmer, Beck, Clausen, Dunk, and Johnston. Sub-Inspector Marsack, in his annual report, said all the hotels were found, on inspection this week, to be in a clean ami satisfactory state, with the exception of one referred to more fully later. During the last quarter

the licensee of the Club Hotel had effected considerable improvemnts by the erection of an extension to the

brick wing on the eastern portion of the house. The present staff quarters,

a woodc.

fiire. was to be demol

ished on the completion of the above additions. The re-erection of the old portion of the Princess Hotel was now completed, and had been carried out in a satisfactory manner. Phoe-

nix: As reported at last quarterly meeting, and in every report furnished to the committee for the past two years, the wooden portion of the house is in a dilapidated condition, and some'of the rooms are not fit for occupation, the walls and ceilings being discoloured by water percolating through the roof. The question

of rebuilding this portion of the house had been allowed by the committee to

stand over until after the next local option poll, but so far back as the December meeting the committee ordered that the urgently needed repairs to the roof and dwelling room should be put in hand at once. On inspecting the house for March meeting, he found nothing had been done, and reported to that effect, when the committee renewed its previous order. On inspection on the 22ml inst. he was surprised to find the rooms in the old portion of the house in the same condition. Apparently some kind of repairs had been made to the roof, but inefficiently, inasmuch as he found fresh water stains on the walls and ceilings of the rooms. It was useless to repaper and paint these rooms until the roof was made perfectly watertight, and that required to be done at once.

In a special report on the conduct of hotels, attention was drawn to the conviction of bookmakers for betting during April in hotels. The following transfers were granted:—E. J. Ible to F. J. Swindell, Junction Hotel, Longburn; S. J. Whiteford to F. B. Tutte, Post Office Hotel. Mr Innes appeared for the transferees. New licenses in respect of old houses were granted as follows:—Wm. Owen (Railway), F. J. Swindell (Junction), F. B. Tutte (Post Office), W. Dale (Family), B. Douglas (Masonic), J. J. Mariott (Central), M. O'Reilly (Princess), Mr Innes appearing for all applicants; A. E. Hey wood (New Royal), Mr Cooper for applicant; Wm. Devine (Empire), T. J. Callaghan (Occidental), Mr Innes for applicants; H. B. Tucker (Club), Mr Cooke for applicant; T. Cliilds (Commercial), Mr Innes for applicant; E. Tattersall (Grand), Mr Jacobs for applicant; H. Baker (Clarendon), Mr Fitzherbert for applicant. When the application for a- new licensee for the Cafe de Paris Hotel came before the committee, Mr Fitzherbert, for the applicant, called attention to the fact that the bookmaker convicted for betting on the premises, though he may have been well known as a bookmaker to the police, was not so known to the publie of Palmerston and the licensee, as he had only been here four weeks. Mr Fitzherbert asked for the granting of the license, as, apart from what he had stated, the police report was good. Sub-Inspector Marsack said that the bookmaker was known to the licensee as a bookmaker, as the latter had himself admitted that to the sub-in-spector. Otherwise the hotel had been well conducted.

The application was considered by the committee later.

Mr Moore appeared for S. Paul, on his application for a renewal of the license of the Phoenix Hotel. Mr Moore said that repairs authorised to be carried out had been done, but it was impossible to absolutely keep the rain out until a new building was erected, and this was to be done shortly. As to the conviction against a bookmaker for betting on the premises, the licensee had no idea that the convicted man was a bookmaker, and Mr Moore pointed out that the police had sent a man to bet with the bookmaker, and as it was done on the licensed premises it seemed like adding insult to injury. Mr Cooper, for the owners, said that at the time of the last committee meeting a contract was let to repair the roof. This had not been carried out. and he was assured the trouble had been located, and that the roof was now watertight.

Wm. Kirk, whose firm carried out the work, said the roof was now watertight. Sub-Inspector Marsack contended that the whole trouble would be obviated by a new roof, and he did not think the repairs -would be satisfactory until that was done.

Mr Cooper said it would be a hardship on the owner to have to put a new roof on. as a new building would be erected in a few months.

Sub-Inspector Marsack said the police had not asked the bookmaker to go to a hotel, but the bookmaker had asked the police to go there.

The Bench then retired to consider flic application in regard to the Cafe de Paris and I'hoenix Hotels. On returning, Mr Poynton said that with regard to the bookmakers being on the premises, the committee considered it the duty of the hotel-keepers to find out who were staying in their houses. He hoped the cases would be a warning to hotel-keepers, and if they had any more men such as bookmakers about their places they would make enquiries; probably the police would help them. The committee agreed with the police that these men should be kept away from publichouses. The licenses' would not be withheld, and he hoped the remarks would serve as a. warning. As to the repairs to the I'hoenix Hotel, the license would be held over for a month to see hew the roof was keeping; the rooms inside are to be papered, and a report furnished by the police at the cud of the time. .\ir Fitxherbert asked it' the Magistrate contended, by his remarks, that licensees should refuse admittance to reputed bookmakers. Me l'oynton. replyin, stated that in one of the cases, the bookmaker had made bets in the passage way of the hotel on more than one occasion. Hotel-keepers could make enquiries as to such men if staying at their houses, and could ask the police t<> make certain. Of course, a licensee could not refuse admittance to a men desiring board, as he would be liable under the Aft. but at the same time, ho could take precautions to protect himself.