THE WAIKIWI HOTEL

Otago Witness, Issue 2884, 30 June 1909, Page 53

THE WAIKIWI HOTEL

APPLICATION FOR WRII OP MANDAMUS. REFUSED IN SUPREME, COURT. In the Supreme Court yesterday, Mr Justice Williams heard a- motion for ksue of a writ of mandamus to the Awarua Licensing Committee ordering it to grant j the application . of George Dempster, . of j Woodlands, hotelkeeper, *i>r the grant of a publican's license in respect co a house in the Awarua licensing district at Waikiwi, known as the old Waikiwi Hotel, or, in the 'alternative, ordering- it to hear and determine. the"' application. _ * -, - , Mr Neave appeared 'n support of the* application.; Mr "Adams to oppose;. - The Plaintiff, " : n tiis Aa-tement of claim, seS out that? he was an hotolkeeper -at' Woodlands; that- he applied for a JicensS for the old Waikiwi Hotel ; that the committee granted ' 12 publicans' licenses, including a license fox a house at Woodlands, known as • the Woodlands Railway Hotel : that by reason of the change of boundaries last year the Woodlands Hotel was taken out of the Awarua licensing district and ' put into the licensing 1 - district of Mataura, where no-licenss existed ; that the rs3ult of the -licensing poll in Mataura last November was that the proposal that licenses b.5 not restored' was carried; that in ' Avarua the proposal that licenses continue was carried ; and that his application for a hcense for the Waikiwi Hotel was re-" fused. The plaintiff therefore prayed (1)that a writ of mandamus do issue to the committee to compel it to grant the application, or,' in the alternative, to .-ompel the committee to hca-r and determine the application, and (2) tihat the- defendants be ordered to pay the costs of iheso proceedings. \ The defendants, in their statement of . defence, eaid that at the time the licensing poll, was taken there were 11 publicans' hoonses in Awarua. and at the annual jreetiitg of the committee renewals of thcs-3 11 licensej were granted. The application of the plaintiff for & license was not considered on its merits by the committee, the committee having decided that, in view • of the result of the poll, it had no jurisj dio f ion to entertain or grant the applica- ' lion. ' Ma - Neave, in the course, of. his argument, said that the real question was asto the meaning of -.the words in section 24 of the Consolidated Act' of 1908. What was " the * number of licenses existing in tho 'district " at the time the pall was taken? The Representation Commission, having altered the boundaries^ the Wood l land 6 Hotel was taken cut of Awarua and put into Mataura. A 6 a result, if restora--tion. had been carried, undor section 38 of. the 1908 act, it was possible- that- the Woodlands Hotel would not have got a license, because the committee had power to grant licenses to the extent of and not more than the ' number of licenses existing in the district when the granting- was pro- - , hibiled. If each of the persons who had * lest a licenso 'applied again, they would' : in all equity be entitled to receive a license before, any incomer The whole trend of licensing legislation had be«n to put the control into tho hands of the people. .If section 24 were read literally those per--eons who' lost 'thedr licenses last time would ba entitled to a grant of their licenses under section 38, and that would mean the -granting of more licenses than could be . given under section 38. This, was an absurdity, and it also involved a miscarriage of justice, and it did not give effect to thewi.'J of the people. Evidently there was sonuebhing wrong somewhere, and he suggested, that the only way out of it was to construe " tbe number of licenses existing in tbe -district " as meaning- the number of licensee on the official > register that was kept as required by se<H:-ions 148 and 149. Thie would involve no hardship, since the people knew at tho "time of the poll that the n.umibar on the register was 12. and be submitted that rhe court would adopt any reasonable construction in order to prevent injustice. The form of the applicationw.as fqr a .mandamus to grant, but what he asked for was a roan<samus to hear and determine. His" Honor eaid h^ would not call upon Mr Adams to reply. In giving judgment, his Honor said: If I had not heard tbs_caee^ argued at considerable k.nyth I should have thought it was not arguable. The facts are that th-3 claimant had a license in the district of Awarua as it existed- prior to the expiration of the last Parliament. When tho List Parliament expired there was a readjustment of boundaries, and the plaintiff's licensed house . became included in Mattiura, which was a no-license district. Than in November there was a poll of the electors of the Awa.rua district as reconstituted — that_ is, the old. Awarua distinct lees a pi-oca -taken out of it and put ir.fr. th-a Mataura district. The electors of thr» new Awarua district were called upon in November to decide what should take place. One cf the questions nut to them was whether the number of licenses existing in the district was to continue. They decided that the numb&r of licenses exilian: in the district was to continue. The district to which the section makes refer-ence-is, without, the shadow of a doubt, the electoral district— the new electoral district. This particular license did net exist in tho district at that lime. Their? were only 11 licensee that existed in the district at- that time. The voting of the electors of ona district has nothing whatever to do with th.9 licsnsss which at tho time of voting are ours : <?e of fTiat district. There were, in fact, 11 licences existing in tbs d'sti-i«t. What there were on the register of the old distrct has nothing to co with the Question. You have, to look at the googranhicoJ boundariss of the district in which the voters .were and in respect of ihings exdstin.T "m that district the votingtook place. It is quite possible that what. may appear to be rha plain construction of the- aot may g-ive rfte in certain -sees to

inconvenience. If license had baen restored in Mataura it is possible this man might not have been able to get his license. That possibly may be, but it does not follow that bscauee in events which might happen," but which have not happened, something would have happened which was awkward to somebody, the pla/in langn.ia.gG of the law should be twi*.-xl to •meat such a case. T3ie motion, will be dismissed; costs, 10 guineas.