THE NEWTOWN HOTELS.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1682, 25 May 1904, Page 74 (Supplement)

THE NEWTOWN HOTELS.

MEETING.OF THE LICENSING COMMITTEE. . ‘ >&, . ALL LICENSES GRANTED. Following on the cabled decision of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council- in' the. Newtown licensing appeal, a special' meeting of the Newtown Licensing Committee was held jn the 17th' inst. at the Public Library, Riddifiord. street, to deal with applications for licenses for the five hotels in ;f the electorate. But little .public interest was displayed in the proceedings, the attendance being almost exclusively confined to those interested in the licensed trade and a few prominent local .. prohibitionists. The members of the „ -committee present were !Dr A. ‘McArthur, j SAL (chairman)., Rev G. Bond, Messrs JL McKenzie and El Collie. They 'took their seats about quarter of an hour past the appointed time. THE CHAIRMAN’S STATEMENT. The chairman announced at the outsat that he apologise for the ab-

senceof two members of the committee, Messrs Janies Reid and A. J. Rand. Mr Reid was on his way Home at the present time, and he had been granted leave of absence by the committee ; while Air Rand was on business at Gtaki, and could not be present. He (the chairman) desired to state that his colleagues on the committee had met him in the fairest possible manner. They had acknowledged that the matter between them had been simply and only ! a question of law, and that question tho highest Court in the British Empire had now decided against them. His colleagues were now prepared to receive that decision in the most open and .generous manner, and, of course, to proceed further with their own ideas with reference to license or no-license as they .might think fit; but they were not going to offer any objection whatever to the granting of licenses at the present moment. Before calling the first case, it would be well to hear the remarks? of the Rev Mr Bond, who had embodied the ideas ,of the committee in a short statement he was about to make. With that statement he was con amore in every reSpect. He approved it, and lie thought there was nothing which ;

occurred between the committee and himself, outside , of the difference of opinion regarding the law, that had been anything but friendly. The committee had met him in the most friendly manner, and he thought its members would admit that he liad met them in the s.ame manner. ATTITUDE OF THE COMMITTEE. The Rev G. Bond then made the following statement : —Your Worship,—ln consequence of the decision ; r of the Privy Council on the Newtown licensing case, endorsing your Worship’s reading of the though contrary to the interpretation put upon .them by the elected members of the committee, we meet to-day, and owing to the altered conditions and the importance of the case, I ask your Worship’s permission to make the committee’s position clear, and in doing so I should like to rectify an error which appears in the columns of the public - press, namely, that the committee was returned as a “ no-license committee.” Such was not the case, as the newspaper reports of .the meetings will show. Its members were elected to administer the law as they understood it. Accordingly, at the annual meeting > in June last, licenses were refused by the committee, not as prohibitionists, but- because, according to their interpretation of clause 3s of the .Alcoholic Liquors Sale Control Act 1 Amendment, 1895, they considered the*/' had no jurisdiction. That position was upheld by* many solicitors of great experience and legal' acumen, and also by a 1 majority of Judges in the" highest Count in the colony. Seeing, however, 'that that interpretation, has been declared erroneous by the Privy Council, the is now prepared to accept that; decision with good grace. The" committee considers it is not compelled to grant licenses until the issue of a mandamus by the Supreme Court, or, possibly, until the arrival of the sealed judgment of the Privy Council from London. It is, nevertheless, prepared to act in a spirit of fairness and generosity now that it knows beyond doubt that it. has jurisdiction. And, recognising the fact that the licensees have suffered considerable inconvenience and loss—not through the bias or prejudice of the committee, but through the obscurity of the statutes—it is prepared to. consider the applications for licenses without needless delay. I thank your Worship, on my own behalf, and that of my fellow-committeemen, for the opportunity of stating the position from the committee’s point of view, and of expressing the hope that by legislative action such a deadlock will be rendered impossible in the future, and expensive litigation rendered, unnecessary. THE GROSVENOR HOTEL. THE QUESTION OF LICENSE DUTY. The fiisit application was for a renewal of a license- for the Girosvenoir Hotel W the farmer licensee, Robent Barclay Mr T. Young'appeared in support of the application. • \ . The chairman, in announcing that the license would he- granted,'observed that Dfc was to ha clearly understood that the licenses then granted only field good, until June 4th,; when the annual meeting of the committee would he. held, and when each case woulld he dealt with on its own merits. Mr Young -said that.fie and his learned'friends appreciated the spirit in which the Bench had met the matter. They realised _ that it was really a difference of opinion fotr which the committee ought not to he held hlamable. The chairman: I wish to state thatthe committee has unanimously come to the conclusion that ilb would not be fair to the licensees to mulct, them for the wholes.of the license duty for- the past year. The decision has been arrived at that -they consider one-third of the license fee sufficient, considering that the license as had otniy two. mouths’ enjoyment ctf their licenses, and whatever remnants, may come on now. I wish to anticipate any application that .may be made. Mr Weston: The question is—-is it a matter fofr the committee, seeing that it is a tax payable, to. the City Council ? The chairman: What I have stated is the decision of the committee. If it is

found that we cannot do so, we cannot help that; hmt I think there is a section of the Act which says that there may be a proportionat© amount paid. The committee is with me heartily in the matter, and that will be our recoin, mendation. Mr Young: There is a section of the Act which provides for a proportionate amount being paid. THE PARK HOTEL. . Mr Western on behalf of Frank Smith, the former licensee of the Park Hotel, applied for a renewal of the license. Counsel ©aid there was an application for a transfer also, but with the permission of the Bench, he would like it to

stand over. His client was at the present time licensee of the To Aro Hotel, and it had not yet been decided which of them he would transfer. The dhairman observed tiliat i'li/8 committee had considered that matter, and. lie knew Mr Smith was in charge of another hotel. Provided the solicitors arranged the matter betwem themselves, the license would be gnmted. A temporary transfer in the same case was allowed to stand over until Monday. NEWTOWN HOTEL. THE MACARTHY-CORBY DISPUTE. There were two applications for renewals of the license for the Newtown

Hotel —"by P. W. Or by, tbe former li'oensee, ancl H. G. HcKildswcrth, respectively. Mr C. B. Moris on, on behalf of Mr Corby, asked that the matter should be allowed to stand over for a week. His client was lessee of the hotel. for a term of ten yeans, only two of which had expired when his lease was terminated by default by the landlord, Mr T. Cr. Macarthy. Mr Corby had paid sometiling like £I7OO for a year and nine months’ occupancy of the hotel, in addition to the rent djivving that time; and at the present time negotiations were proceeding between him and Mr Macarthy for the restoration of the lease. In view of that, he asked that the granting of a license for the hotel should stand over for a week. It might he that nothing would come of the negotiations, but he could foresee technical difficulties if the matter was dealt with otherwiseMr Weston stated that he appeared for -.-Messrs Macarthy and Houldsworth, the owner and proposed new tenant of the promises, respectively, and he wished to apply for a special certificate ot transfer under section 94 of the Licensing Act, 1881. He opposed any adjournment of the matter. It was indisputable that Mir Cobby had been legally ejected from the premises, and after due notice. Mr Macarthy had had to enter into possession. Mr Corby had fought Mr Macarthy right throughout in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal on technical points as to payment of the mortgage moneys. Counsel said he should ask for a special certificate, of transfer, as provided for under the section he had quoted. Mr Morison: I don’t think my client has ever been legally ejected; the lease was determined.. The chairman: If the lease was determined, cannot the landlord put in anybody he likes?

Mr Morison: It was entirely the result of the refusal of the Licensing Committee to grant licenses that brought about the present state of affairs ,between Mr Macarthy and my client. That being so, and as Mr Macarthy and Mr Corby, or their solicitors, are in negotiation at the present time, I would ask that the matter be allowed to stand for a week to see if my client could have the lease restored on some terms that would enable him to take it up, especially seeing that he has paid for the goodwill of the lease a sum of £I7OO, as well as rent for a year and nine* months. Mr Weston said he did not allege that his client would not enter into negotiations with Mr Corby. . Of course, the terms'" were there, if lie cared to accept them. Mr Corby bad deliberately said he was not going to stand the slightest risk in connection with the Newtown Hotel. He had put Mr Macarthy to the expense of fighting an action in the Supreme Court and in the Court of Appeal. He had left the premises; they had been vacant since December 16th, when the landlord entered into possession, and the owner should now be entitled to get the license as asked. The granting of the application need not prevent Mr Corby from negotiating afterwards. The chairman: If we do as you ask, we put Mr Corby in a wrong, position., Mr Weston: How can he be put in a wrong position? He has no right to the place whatever; he has been legally ejected; and under section 94 of the Act of 1881, the license gees to the house.

The chairman: I am not so sure of that. We don’t want to commit any wrong upon either landlord or tenant. How can Mr Corby come to any terms if we grant the license to somebody else ?

Mr Weston: He has been ejected from the premises and has no right to go on the premises, and his lease has been determined.

The chairman: It has fccen pointed out to me hy a member of the committee that the decision of the committee in refusing the licenses at the last annual meeting has been the means of putting him out of this hotel. Mr Weston: It was Ms own desire not to run the risk of fighting it out. The chairman: Supposing the committee had granted the licenses last time, the position he is in now would not exist.

lMr Weston: Why should not we have our rights? Why should your Worship put Mn Corby in the position to be able to go to Mr Macarthy and say—“l shirked the fight. Although I was going to leave you without paying a penny of what I agreed to give you before, I want to have the best, terms I can,” when lie had not the pluck to take the risk? The chairman: I know that, hut we want to- he fair to all parties in the matter, and especially to licensees who have suffered—and suffered very keenly under this wrong interpretation of the law. .. ... , . Mr Weston: I would like to know the legal position taken up by the committee if my client says to Corby “I absolutely refuse to give you back the lease of those premises ?” ' Wliat position is the Bench going to take up? Are you going to say—“Me are not going to give a license to the owner, who, under section 94 of the Act of 1881 is entitled to it? I told my learned friend this morning the bedrock terms I was prepared to take. The chairman: You are not going to move from those terms ?

Mr Weston: No; they are, in my opinion, fair and honest terms. The chairman: It is not for the committee to enter into the terms. I am certain we don’t want to hold bank this license, but we want to see fair play between landlord and tenant. Mr Weston: If my friend is prepared to take those terms to-morrow morning, the transfer need not issue. When I got word a fortnight ago indicating how the decision of the Privy Council would likely go, I mentioned the matter to Corby then, and he had ample opportunity to go into it since. Mr Morison: My application is not to refuse to grant to anybody at present, hut to let the matter stand over for a week. The house has been closed since September, and the loss for another week can’t he much. Mr Corby wants to save, if possible, the £I7OO he paid for one year and nine months’ occupancy of the hotel, and if Mr Macarthy will take that into account in the price to be paid for the restoration of the lease, then there is a possibility of an arrangement being arrived at. I have at present a verbal offer under consideration, and it will take some time to deal with it. The offer was made this morning about ten o’clock, and was something very different from what 1 had anticipated. Mr Weston: I told my friend wliat the bedrock terms were, and his client has had ample opportunity within the last four months of putting himself in the position of starting afresh. Mr Morison: It is only with a view of doing my client some measure of justice that I ask the matter to stand over for a week. The chairman (after consultation with his colleagues): The committee is of opinion that this should he adjourned until Monday, the 23rd inst,, at noon. Mr Weston: I must protest. I don’t know whether your Worship is within your rights in the matter. The discussion then ended. ISLAND BAY AND KILBIRNIE HOTELS. On the application of Mr Young, William D. Halley, former licensee of the Kilbirnie Hotel, was granted a renewal of his license. William Redmond, former licensee of

the Island Bay Hotel, was granted a renewal, oil the application of Mr Weston. The committee then adjourned until Monday next.