dispensed with these requirements, and even applicants to whom the Superintendent had refused certificates obtained licenses by the Governor's order.[1] Nor had the chaplain's signature always been attached to the successful memorials. In the case of Sydney this laxity might well have been justified by the dictates of common-sense, for the Rev. Mr. Cowper was inclined, like many other clergymen, to regard attendance at church as the final test of morality.[2] At the same time the neglect of their recommendations or refusals to recommend made the magistrates perfunctory in their duties, and to a large extent accounts for the number of worthless persons to whom they gave certificates. The combined opinion of the Bench would have given far greater security than a testimonial signed by an irresponsible magistrate and confirmed or set aside by the Governor. It was impossible for the latter to "have individually so many opportunities of becoming acquainted with the characters of the inhabitants as the magistrates, who have them more immediately under their control".[3] In the few instances in which the Bench did offer their opinion, Macquarie acted in opposition to it. A license given in spite of their contrary advice had later to be withdrawn,"[4] while in another case his independent mode of action led to a shameful abuse. "A man … convicted of felony before His Majesty's Court of Criminal Jurisdiction, and sentenced to hard labour at the Coal River,[5] not only succeeded in obtaining his remission from that sentence, but actually received and still has a license to keep a public house, and this only a short time after he had received the sentence of the Court."[6]
One regulation was rigorously adhered to. "No person," declared the General Order of 30th January, 1813, "who is still under sentence of the law as a convict, will receive a license, neither are any constables, clerks or other persons in the service of Government to be licensed as publicans". However, the disqualification did not extend to the free wives of male convicts or the free husbands of female convicts.[7] Probably the
