ONEHUNGA LICENSING COURT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XVIII, Issue 6259, 8 December 1881, Page 3

ONEHUNGA LICENSING COURT.

PROPOSED LICENSE FOR MOUNT ALBERT. Thß quarterly meeting of the above Licensing Court was held at noon yesterday, at the Court-house, Onehunga, and was composed of Mr. J. E. Macdonald, R.M. f Chairman, and Messrs. James Robertson, J. D. Jackeon, and Thomas Paton, Commissioners. The principal busi-iess of the Bench was to consider an application lodged by Samuel Stephenson for a new license for a new house, to be called the Mouut Albert Hotel. A great deal of interest was manifested in the proceedings. About twenty of the leading residents in Mount Albert appeared in Court in the character of objectors. Mr. E. Hesketh (Hesketh and Richmond) appeared in support of the application, instructed by Mr. Alexander, and Mr. E. K. Tyler appeared for all the objectors. The application was signed by Messrs. J. Rogan, James Bound, Charles Turk, H. H. Martin, Mark Woodward, R. C. Greenwood, H. S. Wallace, Wra. Motion, Frederick Young, and J. H. Daubeney. Eleven objections in writing were lodged, and the following generally may be taken as the grouuds of objection I. That there was no necessity for such a place in the district. 2. That the house would prove a nuisance, because of the number of loafing and drunken men who would be drawn thither, as well as the likelihood of creating a similar class in the district. 3. That the presence of drunken and dissolute characters would be detrimental to the morals of the children and young people in the district. 4. There are no commercial or business men visiting the district who would be likely to require the accommodation usually supposed to be offered by such a place. 5. Such a house would only prove a temptation to such as are weak minded to indulge too freely in " the accursed thing." 6. is a new Licensing Act has been passed by the Assembly, and is now only awaiting the proclamation of the districts by the Governor, no new license should be granted till the residents had an opportunity of expressing their opinion on the subject under tbe Act. There were one or two other grounds of objection, but these were the principal, and the chief objectors were the Rev. Mr. Haseldcan, Messrs. 0. B. Stone, James N. Ward, Thomas Wallace, James Reid, Thomas Allen, J. Tonson Garlick, Edward Allen, and Mrs. Emma Hastie, and Messrs. Allan Waterhouae and Frederick Battley.

Mr. Hesketh said there was an application by Mr. Stephenson for a new license for a new house, and it was now before the Court, and the necessity for such a house was certified tu by 10 persons residing in the immediate neighbourhood, also certifying that the applicant was a tit and proper person to hold a license, and he therefore asked that the license should be granted.

Mr. Tyler said he had to take a preliminary objection, which, if sustained, would dispose of the case in a fewmoments. It was this, that the Court could not grant tho license applied for because the Licensing Act, 1881, precluded the Court from granting the application. Section 1 of the Act stated that it came into force on the Ist of October. By the 45th section of that Act they found that from ami after the date of that Act coming into force no new publican's license or bottle licenses could be granted, except a poll of the residents in the district w*s taken, as required by Section •17. It was within the judicial knowledge of the chairman that no such poll had been taken, and therefore the Court could not grant the license. Mr. Hesketh Baid this argument raised the whole question of whether the powers of the old statuto were repealed, eo far as the granting of new licenses were concerned. He quoted the repealing clause, and also sections G and 7 of the Act as bearing on the question, especially the latter portion of clause 7, which provided for existing Acts and commissions remaining in force until the new districts under the new Act had been proclaimed.

Mr. Tyler said the ground taken by Mr. H«isk«th was cut from under his feet by clause 40. The time for doing some of the things required by this Act had gone by. The detciinitiation of the minds of the residents was to be taken some time in ISB2, but the Legislatuio had determined that local option should be brought into force, and the objest wan that no new licenses should be issued except by the vote of tho ratepayers. For that purpose the Act stated that from and after the dale of this Act coming into operation (tho Ist of October) these things shall take place, not from aud after the creation of new distiicts or the abolishing of old districts, but from and after the Ist of October local option shall be the law. Section 7 kept the old Act in fotce for certain purposes, but the whole Act must be read together, and section 45 was distinct on the subject.

Tho Chairman said one of the commissioners was of opinion that the new Act did not apply, and the other two had left it to him to express their opinion. It was perfectly clear to him that the new Act did not apply, for although scction 45 said that no new license shall be granted, except under certain conditions, that section was not in force till the districts were proclaimed. Section 23, which was almost similar in terms, provided that no renewal or transfer of a license should be granted, except under like circumstances. His opinion was that they were not ruled by section 45 or section 28, and that they had no force until tho districts were proclaimed, nor had any other portions of the Act, except clauses 2, 6, and 7, which were specially provided tor. Mr. Tyler said he had another objection to urge, and that was that one of the persons purporting to sign the certificate did not sign it. It was signed by his wife. The Chairman asked Mr. Heskoth what wculd bo the result supposing one of the signatures was a forgery ? Mr. Uesketh replied that then he should be out of Court. Mr. Tyler said the Act provided that the certificate must be signed by ten householders, but here they had only nine. James Bound, whose name was to the certificate, did not, he was informed, sign it, but it was signed by hi* wife. Mr. Tyler called Mr. Stephenson, who was sworn. Ho deposed : I am the applicant iu this case, and that document (produced) is ray application in duplicate. I obtained the signatures personally. The signature "James liound" was signed by himself in my presence a short time previous tothe application being sent in. He saw Mr. Bound himself, not by his wife. His wife was there when he signed it. By Mr. Hesketh : Mrs. Bound did sign a document in her husband's presence, but it was not one of those applications. It was a form of application, but it was not on this account that the new application was drawn up and feigned, James Bound deposed that he was a baker at Mount Albert, and knew the applicant, who cjime to him and asked him to sign a document. He came firjt about three months ago, and again on a subsequent occasion. He signed a document on tho second occasion. Tho signature to one of the documents was his; the other he thought was not. He had two or three talks with Mr. Garlick, but did not toll him he did not sign this application, nor did he s:iy thatlhe need not be subpuenaed that he would come out and swear to the facts.

By th© Bench : He only signed on one occasion, and only recollected signing ono document. The witness was confounded with his two signatures and two signatures of his wife's. To Mr. Hesketh: He had been summoned to attend here by Mr. Garlick. J. Tonson Garlick deposed that ho drew up sit Mr. Bound's shop on tho 30th of November. Ho camo to the shop door, and witness asked him how ho signed Stephenson's application. He said it was all dono in a minute—his wife signed it. Witness asked him if it was with his knowledge and consent. Ho evaded the question, and said he thought a public-house would be a good thing. When witness served the subpoena on him, ho said he did not think he could do him any good. To the Bench : The witness was his baker, and he was astonished At his having signed such a document, but he did not question him with the right to control him. He had asked the same question of others. Tho question was then decided on the facts. Mr. Hesketh said the building was a very good one, and when finished would cost not less than £1200, besides which there would be stabling, &c. Mr. Stephenson had experience as a publican, he had adventured a large amount of capital, and having received encouragement ho proceeded to erect the building. The house was on the New North Koad, and was three miles from the nearest publichouse, on the Auckland (side. The next hotel

on the other side, tho Whan, was two miloi distant. That was somo grounds for advancing tb« views of its necessity. It was cloao to the railway station, and persons coming to the Btation or Public-hall required some place to leave their horses. At the corner of the road WtiH the stand for the Mount Albert omnibus. Mr. Battley deposed that he resided about three-quarters of a mile from the sito of the house for which the license was applied. He objected to tho granting of the license on general grounds ; that it was not required ; it was not a natural depdt, and on specifio grounds, that it would tend to demoralise the young people in the neighbourhood, and be detrimental to the interests of the district. The great bulk of the resident householders objected. There were no hotels near the site than the Eden Vine and the Whan, except E Jgecuinbe's, which was on a different ro id. He never saw anything -which could load hiin to believe that the house was required for accommodation.

To Mr. Hesketh : His grounds of objection were not, necessarily, based on abstinence principles. The witness explained the position of the site near the railway station, and a junction of four roads. Mr. Hesketh then proceeded to urge the grouuds 011 which the application should be granted, pointing out how rapidly the Mount Albert district was increasing, aud the station must become a considerable centre. No personal objection was raised to Mr. Stephenson's fitness. He noticed one objection was that all the residents in the neighbourhood were able to keep a stock of drink in iheir own houses, and, therefore, did net require to go to a hotel; but. surely, thit objection was tiuged with seltishueas. The objections he urged savoured of the fanciful and sentimental, and pure matters of opinion, and based on their own views as to temperance, and the objections ca&a almost exclusively from total abstainers. He again referred to the necessity for the house, lie submitted that the object of the objector® was to keep their neighbourhood select, but that was a question with which the Court had nothing to do. The question was, Did tha traffic require an accommodation house ? He submitted that was the only question which had to be considered, and he .asked that the application be granted. Mr. Tyler said tho building was in an untinished state, and under those circumstances the Bench could not grant the license. The said the course adopted was to adjourn tho application till the building was built, and furnished. Mr. Hesketh said tho building would bo ready by the Ist of January, and the license could not eotne into force before then. Mr. Tyler then proceeded to address theCouit on the merits of the application. He asked ought the Bench, in the face of the fact that the new Act of local option came iuto foree in the beginning of the year, grant a license, without giving the people the right to say whether they desired it or not? The judicious course he submitted would be to leave it over till the vote of the householders was taken. It appeared to him that the object of the applicant in making his application at this stage was to steal a march on the residents. He then proceeded to de*l with the separate objections. He produced a document, signed by 54 people, requesting that the license should not be granted. He had another memorial from G3 persons in the habit of travelling on the road, stating that tbe house was not required, and requesting that the license be not granted. It was signed by Dr. Pollen and others. A similar protest from business travellers and others, to which signatures were obtained by Mr. Stone, was also presented. He now asked whether it w.is necessary for him to call evidence.

Mr. Hesketh said he liad already offered to admit the objections. All the objectors could do wt3 to depose to their objections. Mr. Tyler called Mr. Garliek, who deposed that he had st great ileal to do with getting the memorial up. They had only twenty four hours to got the signatures. The majority of those who signed resided within a radius of two miles of the site of the hotel. Not more than fifty families reshlrd within that radius. The proportion of residents opposed to the application was fully nine-tenths of those within a radius of a mile. There was not such traffic on the road as would rrquire a halt. The principal traffic was from the Whau to Auckland, To Mr. Hesketh : He would be surprised to learn from a resident in the district that there were 150 families within a radius of two miles of the hotel site. Some of the resident*' seivants might have signed the memorial. To the Bench : He m*t uo refusals from those he asked to sign. One man refused, but his wife bigned it. In regard to his own objection, he believed the establishment of a hotel would depreciate property, by driving away settlers who did not wish for the annoyances of a hotel, and that entered largely into his objection, but he had reason to suppose that dancing and other inducements would be used to draw custom to the house. His Worship said the license would then be forfeited, so he need not trouble himself on that score. To Mr. Hesketh : He was a total ab*taiuer, but it was not altogether from that point of view he objected. Mr. Hesketh handed in a memorial signed by 133 people in favour of the application, and the applicant would depose that he could have got 500 hail he known there would be opposition of this kind. He then replied to Mr. Tyler's argument re the license not being granted whea the house was not finished aud other objections, and said he was prepared to give any guarantee that the house would be finished. The Chairman asked whether they had power now to grant the license when the house was not finished ? Mr. Hesketh thought they had, leaving the certificate in the hands of the officer of the Court, not to be given up until the police certified that it was fit for occupation. Mr. Tyler said he never knew an instance of the sort. He saw nothing in the Act empowering the Court to grant a conditional certificate. The Commissioners then retired for a few minutes. On their return to the Bench, the Chairman said the point on "vhich they decided tha application w;is this : They concluded that it was quite clear the Legislature intended that the colony should theuceforth have the advantage or otherwise of local option, and that fulL effect should be given to it ere this. No doubt, on account of the cumbrous nature of the machinery required for workiug that Act, delay had been caused, but the Bonch did not wi*h to deprive the locality of the benefit of the Act. They concluded not to grant the application on this giound, but to leave the roeiit* of the Act to be discussed when the new Act was in force. T3ANSFEIW. The following transfers were granted Ellerslie Hotel, from John Morrison to Joseph Ellis ; Manukau Hotel, from James A. Whitson to Thomas Kice; Prince Albert Hotel, from \V. E. Allan to Edward Ward Sladder. This was all the business.

New comers wishing to furnish quickly can do so in one day by purchasing from tho largo stock at the City I lull Arcade. The proprietors study to keep furnishing goods to suit all classes, and sell at cheap rates. An immense assortment of bed-room furniture, which, with few. exceptions (such as iron bedsteads, toilet glasses, etc.), are manufactured by themselves at their factories in Lorne-street. The greatest variety of carpets in tho Island can be shown by Garlick and Cranwell. Tapestry, from *2s lid per yard ; Brussels, from 4s lid ; jute, from SJd. Novelties, just arrived: the "Royal AxminBtcr" carpet, with handsome border; the \Vorceste* stair carpet, made of horsehair, very durable; hand* some coverings for drawing-room suites, and latest designs in Brussels, buyers get 5 per cent, discount for cash at time of purchaso on all furnishing goods The drapery and clothing departments are conducteC on the Co-operative Cash System, and goods are marked at a small advance on cost, and it is only by the very large turn over of capital that the business is made remunerative. Support the cash system and purchase rora Garlick and OranweU,, City Hall Arcade, and you will not have to pay for the people's bad debtsi

Good Advice.—Now is the time of year for Pneumonia, Lung Fever, &c. Every family should have a bottle of Bohchee's German Syrup. Don't allow for one moment that cough to take hold of your child, your family, or yourself. Consumption, Asthma, Pneumonia, Croup, Hemorrhages, and other fatal diseases may set in. Although it is true Gzhman Syuup is curing thousands of those dreaded diseases, yet it :s mufh better to havo it at hand when three doses will cure you. One bottle will Jast your family a winter anil keep yon safe from danger. U you are oonsumpt've, do not rest until you hare tried thiq remedy. Sample bottles 6d. Regular size, 3s 6d. Sold by all chemists and wholesale by New Zealand Drug Comnanv, Auckland,{Wellington. Dunedin. and Chriatchurchf