Lists (None yet)

Login to create lists

Tagged (None yet)

Add Tags

Comments (None yet)

Add New Comment

No corrections yet



i The annual meetmg of the Adelaide ¡Licensing. Bench, which wa« held at the Sádeka'de Police Court on Tuesday, was ©f mojcé" than usual interest to hotel keepers', because of the endeavor on the part of the police to close several boteis. Sie basi* of the nroceedin«H was the, con- ditions of-the buildings m quest¡on,<->some of which.* were alleged to be, "dilapidated ,. jsn4-*ainoos.VJ. The court was crowded

io the doors, and seldom has such a ; îarge number of people been present. i "Mr. T. Gepp, S.M., Dresided, and v with

îurtKvôn-tthe bench were Messis. T. H. Brisker. A. McDonald, MP., G^^F 'Ck , mdjse, 'W. H: Burford, C Wells; V. taw

*ence, and the Hon. J. Lewis, MLC ,' ( Lord Raglan Hotel.

The renewal of the license of Susanna Slat*»., and ^Florence Jenämg in respect to the.*Lord|Jlaalan Hotel; Waymouth^strjeet^ ? "was opposed r>y the pcHice on the ground

¿of the dilapidated state of the premises Mr, G.'J»j$are, one of the proprietors I ot'lahtfjömicSilg, put m plans of a building

proposed »to be-erected on the site of, the - preséâtshotel. He admitted, thetold budd .' iog was m a delapufated condition, and * »aid the proprietors desired 'to erect va sub , stantial,;hoiel, furnrsned throughout, and I nd^&k&h that the consideration of the f arpjji&tton be adjourned for 12 months ï ^wpelràiitfthè^building to be erected and J . ¿furnished. TendeisJt.wi>uld be invited c wühitt a week, for the work

- fAtfs'adjotirninent for sis months was î gtpntedjnoväex that substantial progress

mightJbpjThaile with the budding m the i -meantime.

Ï Flagstaff Hotel, Darlington.

HotóíaoíUrsn made application for the tcri¿wal\of his license for the Flagstaff

; Hbfeä, à't TJaplington. Mr. F *A Cha$-,

*" man, public officer for the Lion 'Brewing * - Company, the proprietors,, of the hotel,

v .«aid he^adimtted that the building* "Waa j

iwmetoháíz^aiítiquated It was now pro "* yopeaNio nul} /own the hotel, and erect í a"ncfl¡£ oouduig, the plans of which had 1 been prepared. He asked for an ad- 's goarnment for nine months,, so, that the v aew hotel ^pould be built. *,* t

, > ThB*eas¿'was adjourned,fdr>sx montlu, 3 «nd ¿hetappkcation for^lhe, renewal of the î licenlif-was' granted. \ "

A ; Backs Head Hoeel^StepneyA * % \ In^reganl to the application of K D

*X«,EMlffdr,a renewal of publican's and

Iriifianis -Ikafse/ the police again lodged a. compsinfr:tnat the premises-were 'iruin 7 ona and dilapidatedt>^" Mr. R. W.-Ben sett, wiio appeared sfor^the applicant, oo , Jected üiatitbe information -alleged a % donJSla^ffence', and Dr. Eicbards, who ap ( * Be&ß^jgjr^fcbe Crown, amended the in

îïonaa&ola^oy^striking ont "ruinons Jand ' is Mr. Bennett further complained that the iicenBee-jgaa charged with having äÖowel ^Tieaaenuses to become dilapidât«!, -where ^Îs^&Èseçdénbe would show that the con

* ffilsp^Sfthe house was better to-day ihan; | when the license i was granted* or » J3ichardg intimated that he did not propose VJto .press Joca forfeiture '

£ ^¿metästb-JL ask the bench to dis ¡ tnasai^siiilsformation, and then I will 4<vdijmiaaaly%i£ar the bench plans, of a new

lietel, for which tenders are being called »_

X * Mr Gepp-You obje$; to being com | JapJfyáu$fc-To bang illegally com.. % 3lpÊ^p-w no* to"0* illegally

* - Mr."*Bennett-Yes, I submit illegal!*.

f - Bru Bichards-iMy object is not to quibbl« Z 6^éî3îe^.flnesiaons I desire to .see good * î"1^**^'1^"16 &te oi u16 present pre

5* The information was ?withdrawn. ' Ç Mr. Bennett-I submit for the lnforma

iOfcJätes-bench plans of a new hotcf pî^ôf'which -wilhbe,, £4,000 » ** 1 J fliéè^^AMÏQW long will<take? 41 MptBennett-Eight mbnthif-* ; j __ Mr, flepp-The application is granted.

ííPjikc «f ^Wellington Hotel, Payneham

< Ííp¡|sMfpfct represented the applicant, J

kTbnSgaaYjyuËolt, for the renewal of the llice^lçr^h^Dnke of* Wellington T&bei, ^Payneham. He lodged, a stmilar¿c<b5|ec^ , litan as m tite previous case -with "¡regard fto Jtbe ^Mj&EiBafcion, 1"Aä. ^the contract

5\afc£x^fiisJl£he asked that the informa« S'i^^^^^^^Tceattiagree to with-1

^rawOTe information 33iere -was 8r&ar iliealar "Teason why, X-îWiuhdrew^Jhe "«te

" e lasfr ca \. bat l^asm ffiatc>¡

, adiODTnmeirt, ln.this, çaaë. ' Wid "he TfoWhxtämm 5$be^ip§|^^ïïn%ner * the chairman took ja noteof (¡he point he had raised, that, (the information disclosed a double of \Í?nce^,aa¿^aM) charged the hcensea -with ^Uoswnétfhe/.pîace fco'become dilapidated. - iffea&tój^r^tne new building were1- ao 5 gsépí^^txar^tox *he laying of £he^ ínfor

Jjnatjon, and in the lace of vthat the SèôTice -wonld^not 'wrtadraw the lnforma

f jifcHKe^netn-Jiiihie, architect, eaid he aiad-*èçp):fljéirncted by. the S A. Brewing. fPompany to proceed with tia contract,1 Iwlncnlh8d^ijptfyet been actually sísáíed.., fi!EenderB hadfbeen accepted, and¿¿g3,419 |^o$pí^*sptoi on fee new bnflding.

Dr. Bicharás 71said ie would he <jui£e

wilEng to adjourn the information but if the bench was satisfied that it should ,be¿¡withdrawn he woukTnot mind doing: that * .<* T*"^

,Tl|e%-" Chairman-Very well, D5. Jhchards will witSdraw the information*, and tie application w 1 be granted.

The Bedford

" Whep -the case of Joseph H * Ryan, of the. Bedford Hotel, Cume-strect, was called on Mr Bennett, for the applicant said the case Was similar ta the last Plan«, for a new hotel liad been prepared, but the contract had not yet been signed nor tenders called

Dr Richards-With regard to this case, I understand tenders have not been called What I sugga?t is that the case be adjourn -ed} and-when- the -conteacfc-hâs _ actually been signed I willing, to ! withdraw the,information -v , T

Mr Bennett-That is quite fair

The Chairman-We will adjourn this un til September then

Duke of York Hotel

In*the case 01 the Duke of York Hptel, Cume-titreet, the applicants were Margaret J Dary and Bwdgefc;Murpby, and Mr Ben nett explained that the* licensees were not present, because they were convinced of

their innocence

'The Chairman-But are the police con viaced that way? The police suggest she is guilty of Sunday trading, and that gambling-is earned pn there

Mr Bennett-That is only supposition

The Chairman-3f they "were here we could draw their attention to the police report You will lave to tell them to be morejcareful in the future

Mr Bennett-I will convey that to them The application was granted


The police, report respecting the River- ton Hotel, Riverton (William J. Hum- phries) waa thal the hotel 'was generally in an untidy state.

Mr..Humphries said the police had never madar any objection "to him. ' '

Sub-inspector Burchell said the licensee did not jeem to .have a propel conception i of whatTan hotel should-be. He'had called Mr. Humphries^ attention to the condition of bis premises"' previously".

( The Chairman-He had better keep it more tidy in the future.. The license will be 'renewed. -1 ' > \

. -*~ ' ' Baker's Springs.

A complaint was lodged by Sub-Inspec- tor" 'Bushell ' that " tihe Baker's Springs Hotel "at Rhynie (William* A.uLawson) was poorly rartushed, -but the" building was not in a dilapidated condition. t The .license ,waerJfenewedj by the Bench.

'Junction Hotel.

" A-similar complaint was made with re-

gard to the Junction- Hotel, Roseworthy, (Harriet A. Payne), Sub-Inspector Bushel mentioned that the hotel had changed

hands 'since he had made his report, and I he-wa« satisfied "thai' things wodfd be

much, better. The,»bençh .granted the re-i 'newal. " L " '" "' " ''-' *" I - * -, -~ "The Criterion"1 Hotel. " i

, Charles Whallin, of. the Cnterion Hotel, j

was. called before the bench. The Chair- man said-the police had reported that Whallin kept a blackboard in his bar, 'on winch were posted the results of races, I both * local and inter-State. That en- ' couraged a large crowd to congregate in' and around the premises on ráee> days,

and several constables had to be stáfíofrell,{ in;the<yicinity., '"We cannot preventf"tfiafe,,< Mt, Whallin^ *3âid the Chairman, "but i know that on several occasions people have been proceeded against for loitering

. said ithat}.when> the police nmáe^a'iaídíoB"1 ' the'people" congregated there*-JMefr- rushed/

"ball matches were posced^oo them. >4f fthey attracted the betting» people« tbaîf rboiild not be avoided. Other hotels had,

the boards, and ii Mr.' WJballín 'removéüj1

fJie could iü that direction.-j

The Chairman-If Mr. W^aHiiucan 'do anything -to prevent that' hte^otight to.; I That jabalí we can say. The'Kcense will

be'granted, . " ' Y

, "? r Sportsman's Hotel. *' *,\ VA ease in which material opposrtaon was1 taken 'to the renewal of the licensee, was; thafTîîuoonnection with the Soortsrhan/ai HotpJOIByroijg>lace, Adelaide, the^sens«' ftlcwhiohY wasxConrad A. E BottcÈir^pk. ïlîçhards. ,wdih Mr A. J HannSSt? *£&?> lined'&r^«e police, and Mr. >-RS£w. Bennett #h- the., applicant ^ ' *

Dr."1 Richards^saïd the objection teethe renewal of that hcense was that the*;pre miBes were not required for the acconáno .dataoji of the public. The end which itr was desired to attain was not that the number of hotels in the city shouldj.he reduced, but that only such houses as could and really did provide suitable accommoda lïon'-for the pubhe should be licensed to sell mtoxicating Equor. Therefore, it was necessary that there should not be a ^uperñmty of'Bousea in the city If there ¿Vere more houses-licensed than were re- quired for the accommodation of'the pub he the result must necessarily be that they

wouldjiot bave such a good class oí house as the policy of the Licensing Act re- quired. It had been suggested that ,the ¡.¡special provisions of the Licensipg^Act with

¿regard to* the reduction of ¿he number of licenses, had ousfedt'the iurisdictiop- af. the bench to «refuse renewals oh. the ground that hotels were not required for the ac- commodation of the public.

Mr. Bennett-I shall not suggest that; I

shall contend it. , ,r, *"*". > '

¡Thomas H.J Davey, inspector of^liconaed houses, said the hotels in "the ¡vjcihify, of the 'Sportsman were:-Angel Inn, 280 yards away; Talbot, 405 yards; Bushman's Club, 420 yards; Prince Albert, 340 yalda; Hampshire, about 420 yordu; ¿Flagstaff, about 430 yards; and the Cumberland, about 455 yards. The Sportsman Hotel was not required for the accommodation of the public in his opinion. It was a ?single-storey house of eight rooms. In j .the yard there were four ' other * rooms. I There,'were five bedrooms.altogether. At

'the- Angel Inn there were * five "bedrooms, j

at the Talbot eight, at the Bushman's Club seven, .at the Prince Albert seven, at the Hampshire eight, at .the Flagstaff cight^aftid atthe'Cumberlahd''14. ,

¡' Mr. Bènnêit-There are"sixlot?er hotels | in-.the city/- being objected" to on the ground that they are not required for the accommodation of the public?-Yes.

Do you think they are not required? I think they could be welf'done without. The 'public are not suffering^ ii? any way.

I "would not'care if half the" hotels went j

out. '

Can I take it ¿bat there are more, hotels than the seven "that you thiiik ' are not required?-I dont say so., ;'v,;'

Don't you think the AngeOnn' could be done without 3S well as the 'Sportsman? That is in the main street.

If the Angel Inn had^byenMn' a side street you* would have objected ,to it? Yes: that is one of the objections. 'There are too many hotels in that neighborhood.

What other objections have you got to this hotel?-There is not much .aepommo dation at th's hotel. '* V > ' ,

There is the, same number qf "bedrooms as at the *. Angel Inn.-But'they" are not

so good.

With regard to J&e Castle Inn and the Overway Hotel, they are on opposite cor- ners'-Yes. "i -j- ?*

Don't you think the Caafcle-Inn cquld be better done without than-the Sportsman?

-No. ,

Why?-There is more trafic there.

There- are til hotels in the city; of Ade- laide.-Yes. " _ '

And'can I take it Jiotejs are the only ones not required ?-That is all we arc objecting to at present.

Then^are you going to object to others?-I don't know. - .'" 'j «

Have you conferred with "anybody with respect to laying these particular- informa- tions?-Yes, with Inspector Burchell.

Have you conferred with the Attorney General?

Dr. Richards-I shall object.'-', i"It is a matter of State. " ""*'',.<?- '

The Chairman-I shall. natAaltów the question. i ''*" ""'*""' «' '"Mr.'Bennett-The Sportsman has been conducted properly?-Yes.

V* ould you be surprisetrtp h%tt¥ that the takings at this hotel are £56;;. toVc £60 à week?-I don't know what ' thej* "are".. " »

Have you any idea of the number of people that go to this hotel?-No. >

Do you know that the liccnseeSBurehaeed this place for £2,500, ahd'pVul £800 to go into it?-Np. \i^£è$«V \

-, Constable Hannan mentionee'thar^n-umber" "6f hotels in,the vicinity of the\ Sportemaib He said, thai posably all those places we£e not required.j» , , jra^.f» r ,

Mr.-JJennetfc-^-You made.à'<âGpv#8s T)f tiîa residents in the vicimty?ir-")?es!:-«''^ Went round ^añd saw1 a lot of peôp'fë'io'geÉ theix, opinions,as to whether the hotel vwaa <&' 'quired. " ¿ i ¿r*,'.'

".iDid not a large majority sayifliey^anted the"hotel?-Perhaps a majonty¿^bjík pot^a large majority. *' * "* -' » v .

' "Edgar Horace Jacka, agent, residing fn Góñgér-street, ssaid bis property . almost abutted on the hotel grorädT_,T|te,k"'censir'

, .Andi. you ^qjild like to see this place ¿slosed?-No, not for the sake of .closing it.' 1 am not bigoted on,th's, quj&tjm.

\As a matter of "fact you'^thifi« .4¡here is some Sunday trading going > no.ï-^I have ' f *- ' : "

And that *s the ground on Vrnch you ?Qpnose Uns license*-No

You make a practice of opposing hotel heenses'm this neighborhood'--SAbout four years aga there was a winç/Jifiense^-flvhicli

Jam^s/Amos laborer of Byron-place, .«Sid' hjs1* Opinion was that the house was ndt- required In answer .toH^rS.T'BBTmetj;, thVwithesB said he -was*«' teetotaller at present, and he wanted tfefôb^e^ ' bat closed \ li ^~ V

Mr Bennett asked the bench if he thought there was anything to replv to

The- Chairman-Yes, we Wonjd"like to heat you * r

'Mr Bennett said he raised,'tari?l objec tions-that upon the true construction qt the Licensing Act, 1908 the bench had no power, authority, or discretion,¿¿to" enter tain the particular objectton^n ^respect of any hötej situated within the. -kjcaf .¿option district of Adelaide, and niât "assuming that the bench had pawer it had to be exercised judicially He asked who was bfihmd^thesejroceedings ". a fi *, ( ,

Inspector burchell said "he-^was"

Mr BenneffP^It is not ¡.the .mspectoE There is^ some^power behinct the 'throne men^g^ jajijànsçector I applied to the Commíesiicmer^of Pohce, but I couM ge$ flöjTtiiformatfon from him ¿I Jjskor hmi ^wny'these particular houses we,re,Sjelected, -and T showed him the unfairnegB/'oi 1$ àuV The onjy reply T could get iwmJiim was that^he ""Bad nothing to -say I theÇ approached the Attorney Generals-.» *?

Dr Richards-This is not ^Jntító- of endence, and I don't knoww^at ngjit Mr

Bennett has to mention it^ ^ *"

The Chairman-Suppose there 13 an in shgator of these proceedings, what does it matter* We^hav^s e discretion which is not going to-'bfi. interfered wijth any- any-' one * v '» ** i

Mr Bennett-No sir, but if someone is mterfennb-Brith'that discretror^- ^ .

The Chairman-What has that got to

do with it'

Mr Bennett-Will vou tell me why Crown Solicitor is appearing here'

The Chairman-He appears in matters for the pohee

Mr Bennett-I will show yon that ¿his is only another attempt to get the tsame re suit as local option

The Chairman-16 won t affect us m the slightest* degree, and, this seems to me to

be a waste of trme.

I The matter was then adjourned, till this mornings ?*? ^ ,