“ A GROSS INJUSTICE.”

Gisborne Times, Volume XXIX, Issue 3337, 2 October 1911, Page 5

“ A GROSS INJUSTICE.”

RESULT OF REPRESENTATION v COMMISSIONERS’ DELIBERATIONS. HOTELS PLACED IN “ DRY ” AREA. PROTESTING DEPUTATION GETS SYMPATHETIC REPLY. tPEB PIiKSS ASSOCIATION.J WELLINGTON, Oct. 1. ■; .One result of the deliberations of the Representation Commissioners is that the Porirua and Pahuatanui Hotels hare bear put into the Wellington Suburbs electorate, which is “dry/’ and therefore their position in connection with the next licensing poll has been made considerably more difficult that it would otherwise have been. The matter was brought under The notice of Sir James Carroll (in the absence, through illness, of Sir Joseph Ward) yesterday by a deputation from the two districts affected. . . The deputation was introduced by Mr W: H. Field, M.P., and Mr- T. M. Wilford, M.P., whoi urged that it was not only concerned about the hotels, but it wanted: tioi ask the Government to remedy a. defect in, the law. which was perfectly monstrous in its results, that hotels ciould 1 be closed not by the -will of the people, but merely through the movement of population and the consequent action of the Representation Commissioners. Such a, result was never contemplated by the law, and nolicense members of tlie House with whom he had conferred agreed that a gross injustice was caused, and that the result was likely to be prejudicial to tiie no-license movement. What the deputation wanted, said Mr Field, was to. get on amendment of the law passed this session, with the object of removing a. gross injustice. If it was not done this session it would be too late. The Hon. T. Duncan pointed out that, if this sort of tiling went on it would be possible to have prohibition carried out all over the Dominion without a poll of t'he people being taken. Mr- J. E. Fitzgerald remarked that the deputation was the result of the indignation felt by the residents of tlie district, and consisted of the oldest and most respected residents, who felt tlhat they had been subjected to an injustice. - Sir Janies Carroll said, in reply, that tlie deputation had made out a very strong case for consideration. He was sorry tlie Prime Minister was not able to be present. The. whole, question, was not one of political or commercial character ; it was a question of whether the rights granted under existing laws dependent on the exercising of the mil of the people should be taken away, not after an appeal to the will of the people but by the accident of the readjustment of the- electoral boundaries. I- was so foreign and repugnant to every democratic principle on which we prided ourselves. He did not believe that when the' Legislature framed the licensing law it was for a moment, contemplated that traps should be laid in which any section of the people might fall. He thought it was a pure oversight' and accident. It was not a question as to the merits of these hotels or as to whether they were required l ; it was a question virtually as to whether any one section of the community should suffer without being given an opportunity for their defence- If these hotels were required there, it was for the people to say so» and yet. merely through an alteration of the electoral boundaries that right Avas ta'ken away from the people. Relief had been given in similar cases, and that Avas strongly supportive of the claim made by the deputation-. Fie was confident that the fair sense of those opposed to licensed houses would not allow them to pride themselves on any victory achieved through' such an accident. _ He_ .gave them credit tor a sense of fair play in matters of the kind, and! belie\ r ed that they Avoukl accord sympathy to Hie cases mentioned. He avouM lay the matter before the Prime Minister, together with the urgent request that steps should be taken at the earliest opportunity to put matters right.