LICENSING COMMITTEES.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 5247, 18 February 1882, Page 3

LICENSING COMMITTEES.

SOUTH DCNEDIN SOUTH,

The following candidates were nominated at noon yesterday to serve as"" the Licensing Committee for South Dunedin South district:—

Joseph Osmond, proposed by E. E. C. Quick and E. Mace.

John Thomas Roughtqn, proposed by M. Kosevear and R. Hegan. Richard Healey, proposed by W. Collins and John Perkins.

Benjamin Throp, proposed by W. M. x Green and Robsrt Young. Patrick Carey, proposed by Nicholas JMolon.ey and W. Meade.

W. Meade, proposed by N. Molonoy and 'Goo. Smith.

Alfred George Price, proposed by John : Perkins and W. Hargraves. William Wardrop, proposed by W- Har•^reaves and W. M. Green. There was also one informal nomination. The poll will take place on Wednesday, Ist March.

SOUTH DUNEDIN EAST. . .; The following candidates were nominated for the South JDunedin East Licensing ComTriittee :—

7 r \ J.lmes Baird, proposed by William Ptitchie '' nnd Charles Yeates. ', Benjamin Tkrop, proposed by Jesse Mil'tngton and R. W. Price. ■{ William Wakdroi*, proposed by A. T. "■Price and Stephen Southam.

/ Alfred George Price, proposed by M. and David Stirling. 3 KroHAKD Hkaley., proposed by Patrick Pitz1| iatiick and Thomas Healey. & William Sutoliffe, proposed by E. Genever *i^fcd John M'Grath. ps^ Patrick Carey, proposed by P. JTitzpatriek aud William Thomas. William Thomas, proposed by N.Moloney and P. Fitzpatrick. ~ " i John Thomas Roughton, proposed by R. S. \ Howard arid Robert Stewart. ■■■■■■■-■■■.

J,™ OsaoxD, proposed by H. F. Hardy and William Ritchie. There were three informal nominations, one ot the proposers in each case not being on the roll. °

MarchPOll WUI be taken °n Thuradav > 2nd

PORT CHALMERS' EAST. lhe nomination of candidates for the division of Port Chalmers East took place at the Mechanics' Institute at noon yosterday. The persons nominated were :—

A. Cameron, proposed by Messrs J. Jackson and J..Moodie.

W. Scott, proposed by Messrs R. Kinnear and J. M. Cameron.

J. Kermode, proposed by Messrs C. Campbell and A. M'lnnes.

J. A, D. Adams, proposed by Messrs J, Dick and A. Cowan.

Jj£o^y™> Proposed by Messrs W. Jerviss and D. Millar.

W. M. Innes, proposed by Messrs A. W. Johnson and J. Jackson. J. Gott, proposed by Messrs A. W. Johnson and D. Law.

J. Ross, proposed by Messrs A. B. Imrie and J. Morgan. J. Mill, proposed by Messrs J. Gott and D Ihomusou. ¥v?m\oE> Pr°P°sed by Messrs W. Kettle and D. Thompson. ■Rtf" W" 1' Pr°P°sed 'by Messrs E. R. Bolton and D. Thompson. D. Law, proposed by Messrs J. Gott and A. is. lmne.

Tr^i A- ?w M tUS> Pr°P°sed by Messrs W. llettle and W. Jerviss. The Retiirning-ofncer intimated that a poll for the e^ction of five members would take place at the Mechanics' Institute between 9 a.m. and C p.m. on the 2Sth inst

mi , peninsula. ■Hie following niminations for this district were made yesterday :— John Glendining, proposed by Messrs JamesSouness and John H. Prossly. w i jAM Nl chol, proposed by Messrs Henry Wolden and John Maegregor. ■w ,5 NRY ORTH> proposed by Messrs Henry OValden and.Adam Nichol. .Thomas Robert; n, jun., proposed by Messrs Alexander Smaill and Alexander Matm<>son.

JajiSs Souness, i. oposed by Messrs John H. Pressly and W. St -gent. ■John White, mm osed by Messrs David Luke and Adam Nichol.

The nomination of Mr Eobert Braid was declared informal, on account of the name of one of his proposers not being on the roll, lhe poll takes place at the Anderson's Bay bchoolhouse on Saturday, March 4th

_, ■ TOKOMAIRIRO. -Lhe nominations received for the Tokomamro Licensing Committee were •— Henry H. Scott, Table Hill" James Sutherland, Table Hill Robert Palmer, Tokomairiro. lhe last-named candidate had three nominations, but two of them were of course thrown aside, lhe three, nominated were then declared elected.

' IIAUNGATUA. .lhenomination of the following gentlemen to act as a Licensing Committee for the above district took place yesterday:—

James Fulton, proposed by Joseph Burnett and Allan Mann.

Thomas Ross, proposed by Joseph Burnett and Allan Mann.

IT> • Caes°™eßS, proposed by Francis M'Diarmid and Michael Morgan • _ George M'Donald, proposed by Francis M'Diarmid and John Carr. John Fleming, proposed by Allan Mann and Francis M'Diarmid. William Macpherson, proposed by Joseph -Burnett and Allan Mann. Allan Mann, proposed by Francis M'Diarmid and Joseph Burnett. Francis jVl'Diarmid, proposed by John Carr and Allan Mann.

Allan Ma?n NNAN> prOpOSed John Cal' r and

o^JZ?z^n&iz:* d by Thomas A^fflSMar 4: by Th6mas _ William Heenan-proposed by William Nichol and Edward Heenan M^DWAR^ Heenan proposed by William JUunro and William Heenan. William Munro proposed by William Jleenan and Edward Heenan.

BLUESKIN. The nomination of candidates to serve as the Licensing Committee 'for the Blueskin district took place at the Good Templars' Hall, Blueskin, yesterday. Mr Netherwood (tho return-lng-orhcer) .announcedthe names, andstatedthat he would advertise the polling-booths, as there were more than the requisite number (five) nominated. Some four or five persons only were present. The nominations received in writing were as follow:— *

George Bland, proposed by Alexander Anderson and seconded by John W. SteWart George Ed.wabd Charlton, proposed by Alexander Martin, and seconded by James hector. ,

Robert Sutherland, proposed by James hector, a,nd*econded by George Edward Charl-

Rev. Alexander Hanson Finlayson, proposed by Alexander Martin, and seconded by George Edward Charlton. Henry Clark, proposed by Thomas M'Connell, and seconded by Riohard George Harris Jitus Jones, proposed by Alexander Pu'llar, and. seconded by Stephen Carey Kennedy Brown Ferguson, proposed by William Pullar, and seconded by John Clark. William Goldie, proposed by Kennedy J3rown Ferguson, and seconded by James trreen, M.H.R. " David Martin proposed by David Wright, and seconded by Alexander S. Wilson.

MATAU. « I 1? f t oll°wing gentlemen were nominated for theMatau Licensing District:—Messrs George Inglis James Petne, Robert M'Kinlay Willlain Aitchison, and William Samson lhe required number only having been proposed^ the above gentlemen were declared duly elected by tho Eeturning-officer (Mr Nelson)

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Pbiday, 17th February. (Before E. H. Carew, Esq., R.M.) _ In the following cases judgment was given for the.plaintiffs by default, with costs — Guthnfr and Larnach's Co. v. Thomas Chapman, £9_4s 5d ; same v.- John Hornby, £5 ; same v. J. H. Fleming, £37 0s Cd. . ' . iV 1(l mas Patterson and another v. 'Charles Abbott.—Claim £41 ss, commission on the sale of the brig Emily. In this case (previously heard) his Worship gave judgment as follows :—

Tnere aro two independent questions in this caso i 1 Pr h or°. se., to Sivc tho reasons for my decision upon each of them. The one is a question of fact aud relates to what took place between one of the plaintiffs and the defendant on the 13th December Plaintiffs say the effect was not to put an end to their authority to sell the vessel; defendant says that it was I must look-at the surrounding facts to assist me to dec de to which version to give credence tinted the negotiations with a possible purchaser which, U their authority to sell had ceased, they could not expect to lead to any good result, except at the defendant's option On the other side, *t is strange, if the authority had not cea3cd, that the plaintiffs in their account aud settlement of the 11th charged defendant with some small costs of telegama, aud did not wait until the transaction was closed. Then also it 18 unlikely that defendant would have arrowed as he did do to send his'Vt-Sicl a distant voyage" if'he authorised it being then under offer of eaie Then again, it is clear from plaintiffs1 telegram of tho 12th that defendant had promised to give a final answer on ttje following' day. Defendant says that tho final answer was given and negotiations broken W, and plaintiffs deny it. On the whole the evidence (v fcypur of defendant, The other point is this • Sunn were duly .authorised to sell, dW tLv' he ir ProP°6al of *he' 16th Peceuibcr and theren&r Henderson and Macfcriane of tho following d%v eft-'cc, -*S!le °S tho !^ ms Proposed by them? KtUW offer re Vi U3; ■*$»»»<* -got Abbott to extend term, Wn, three or four montbß. We may bfabfeto? nXela io^™ « "f^W BHIJ bear interest at 8 per *. °^,» ?^ $, ""ortgwe. ■ Reply yea or nay." 1 The rt^^'if I.' folfe -4f copt Emily at £1650 deluertJ 1 "% c; £1. 000 , c?sn' balance three "and four months, P 6r d.ePa/ture. Reply when she will leave." . "? SY> '" °F'i er t0 convert a proposal into a promise tvS .acceptance must be absolute and unqualified ; for, unl>°-S3 tliere la such an acceptance on the one part of tho tenn&' woposed on tho other part, there is no expression of"o^e an° tho same common intention of tho parties, but,- a" most, expressions of the more or less different intentions of each party separately; in other words, proposal and counter-proposals. (" Pollock on Contracts," 21.) The reply, to my mind, is clearly a counter-proposal; not an unqualified acceptance, It expresses some of the terms of the proposal, and omitßj'and consequently excludes, others—interest on bills and security by mortgage. On this point, then, if plaintiffs had been authorised to sell on certain terms, they have failed in effecting a binding contract, and would not be entitled to commission on a sale.

Plaintiffs nonsuited, with costs, 05s. S. G. Smith v. Thomas Patterson. —A judgment summons for £15 7s.—Mr E. C, Strode appeared for tho plaintiff.—An order was mado for the payment, of £2 per month, in default seven days' imprisonment. John Lewer y. F. Russell.—Claim £3 Is Id, for goods supplied.—The defendant's wife appeared, and admitted the debt, but asked for time to pay.—His Worship dismissed the case, as there was a clerical error in. the summons.

Guthrie and Larnach's Co. v. John Mason.— Claim £88 4s 9d, for goods supplied by Gibbs and Clayton, whose estato the plaintiffs bought.—Mr Stout appeared for plaintiffs, and Mr MacDermott for defendant.—Judgment for plaintiffs for tho full junount, with costs. • '•'

G. Hirsch v. John Dryden.—Claim £10sfid, for dyeing work done.—Mr Stout appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr MacDermott for the defendant, who paid ss.into Court.—Judgment was given for the plaintiff for the amount claimed.

Defiance Gold-mining Company v. Healy.— ii 18 Wa? a claim for £1C 13s 4d, for overdue calls.—Mr Howorth appeared for plaintiffs'.— Mr btoiit, who represented defendant, raised several legal objections, the first bein°- that the directors were not legally elected, having continued in othco several years without reelection as prescribed by the rules. As this objection was borne out by the evidence of the manager,. Mr Hamilton, his Worship nonsuited plaintiffs, with costs.—A second case was then not proceeded with.

The Court rose at 3.30.

Ixdoljsnt akd Luxurious HABITS, exhausting disease, inactive pecupations, old age, and other causes deprive 'the" lining of the intestines of its vitality. When this is the cose, tho b.owels become torpid. Slow digestion then ensues, accompanied by low spirits, loss of appetite and rest, fetid breath q,nd. din<;y complexion. No such .effects follow, howeverj when the debilitated stomach and bowcls'are vitalised'with Upqi|j?i(Q. \Yolfe% Schiedam Aromatic' Scimrrs.— lAj>vr.j - •