LICENSING COMMITTEES

Otago Daily Times, Issue 18803, 5 March 1923, Page 6

LICENSING COMMITTEES

DUNEDIN CITY. Nominations for members of the Dunodin City Licensing Committee closed with the returning officer, Mr H. Maxwell, at noon on Saturday. There are five positions to be filled, and the following six nominations have been received— John Carroll, nominated by Messrs A. M. Sidey, H. R. Law, and John Moloney. Prank Elsworth Hilliker, by Messrs F. W. Knight, and H. S. Adams. William King, senior, by Messrs R. D. Poison and J. D. Woods. Adam John Nichol, by Messrs A. C. Steward and B. W. Roy. George Ritchie, by Messrs A. Sligo and W. F. Meek. Percy Thomas Wren by Messrs J. H. F. Hamel, E, C. Reynolds, H. C. Campbell, and A. C. Paterson. An election will take place on Tuesday, March 13. DUNEDIN SOUTH. The following nominations have been received for the Dunedin South Licensing Committee: Matthew Henry Seddon, proposed by C, Bragg and A. G. Lambert. T’nomas Henry Dalton, by E. H. Sincock and Annie Christenson. James John Marlow by W. T. Henaghan, and D. C. Stark. Peter Johnson, by G. Stratton and W. J Manly. William Robert Hall, by A. T. M'lndoe and P. G. Stewart. James Adam, by B. Newall and J. W. Dovo. William Wright by H. C. Campbell and W. J. Broadfoot A. F. Quelch, by J. Fleming and J. T. Allan Angus Campbell, by J. S. Ml'Peak and W. J. Duff. John Downie, by M. Robertson and A. E. Poulter. Thomas Butler Leyland, by H. J. Shelton and J. S. Foster. Robert Conn, by H. W. Jones and R. F. Crawley. There being more than the required number of candidates, a poll will be taken on March 13. PORT CHALMERS. The new Licensing Committee lor Chalmers consists of Messrs Richard Brinsley, David Alexander De Mans, Efncst Godfred, Otto Edward Godfred Soli, and Thomas Butchert Wilson. An election was not necessary, as the numhar of candidates did lot exceed the number of members required for the committee. In order to save the expense of an election, which would probably have amounted to £250, an endeavour was made to get the nominating parties concerned to arrive at a mutual understanding. It is said that one of the parties was prepared to nominate two members, the opposing party to likewise nominate two, the fifth candidate to be mutually agreed on. As an alternative the other party wished to nominate four candidates. As a matter of fact, however, the No-license party did not nominate any ot the candidates