A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XIV, Issue 854, 19 July 1906, Page 20

A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION.

The Waikouaiti Licensing Committee met one day last week to consider the case of the Waianakarua Hotel. At the annual meeting of th committee, to give effect to the decision of electors in favour of reduction, refused the license. Application for a mandamus was made to the Supreme Court, and Mr. Justice Cooper held that accommodation licenses were not effected by the local option vote, and the committee was ordered to hear and determine the application. The committtee met, and of its own motion formulated objections, mainly that the premises were not maintained at the required standard. The meeting to-day was to consider these objections. Mr. F. Calvert, for the proprietor and licensee, after dealing with the legal aspect, said he was instructed that there was not a word of truth in these objections. No member of the committee had visited the house, and it appeared as if some malicious person had misled the members. He would put in testimonials from Dr. Evann, Colonel Medland, and others to show that everything was clean and dry, and there were ample conveniences in good order, the stabling was excellent. He called evidence to the same effect. After retirement, Major Keddell, S.M., said on the former occasion he had to give a decision with which he did not agree, and did not make any remark. He was in the same position now. The members of the committee now sai'd thev had another objection. namely, that the premises were within five miles of a licensed house at Ham - den. Mr. Calvert said the posit’en was untenable, and pointed out that the previous committee, of which three of the present committee were members, had no objection to make. After retirement, Mr. Calvert said he did not desire an adjournment if the committee decided against the legal authorities submitted.

The Chairman said he was not concerned with the committee’s decision. He had advised them in terms of counsel’s remarks, but the committee refused the application on the ground of the last objection, and want of repairs. Mr. Calyvert said he would apply to the Supreme Court for a mandamus, and asked for an order that the licensee be allowed to keep open for another month. The Chairman said he would not advise the committee to do that.