SUPREME COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 4249, 9 October 1876, Page 2

SUPREME COURT.

CIVIL SITTINGS,

Monday, October 9. (Before His Honor Mr Justice Williams and a Common Jury.

Thomas Birch v. W. Hooper. —ln this case the plaint ff sought to recover from the defendant, who is proprietor of the ‘Liberator,’ the sum of LSOO as damages for an alleged libel contained in the following article, which appeared in that paper on July 1 :

A few days ago we had the very questionable spectacle of a J.P. laying the foundation stone of a building which is intended for an hotel, but the license for which, we hope, will never be granted. This house, or rather its foundation, is in a suburban township, and is the first of its kind there. The township is quiet, at present, and well ordered. There ore no police there, nor are any wanted ; but let this house be built, licensed, and opened for the sale of drink, and directly that small but quiet community will be burdened with a police station, l A e believe that a chinch is being built in the town, and it is the old story over again with practical illustration—

Wliere God appoints a house of prayer, Satan builds n chapel there. But that the foundation of Satan's chapel should be laid by Thomas Birch, Esq., J.P., is rather too much of a—well, we will not say—-good thing. Our opinion is that Mr Birch holds rather too mvuy offices. How lie can act as devil’s mason and spirit merchant, wo can understand, but how, while holding those, lie can properly discharge the office of Her Majesty’s Commission of the Peace wo are at a loss to comprehend. We believe Mr Birch is a carpenter by trade, and, for all we know to the contrary, he is a very good workman, or, rather, was once. He may also be a very good mason, at least good on ugh to lay the foundation for the devil’s chapel; and we have no doubt—no. not the slightest —but that he would make a very consistent worshipper when the building is up, and, in addition to those, ho is a good spirit merchant, and withal “a jolly good fellow." Wo have always thought Mr Birch a hearty and agreeable man j but we do think that ;t is altogether too much to expect him to offer his “ great unpaid " services to the public, especially since he has taken to laying foundation stones for Satan’s chapels. He should, therefore, bo relieved from the onerous work of the J.P.-ship. Ejit, to bo serious, we think it is bringing the office of a Justice of the Peace into contempt, when, after consigning poor drunaen wretches t > gaol for using what they bought at hotels, for Justices to go and lay foundations for more hotels when the laud is already overrun with those dens of infamy. It is a blot on Christendom that allows such things. It is too much for human forbearance that one man should be allowed to sod drink, assist in building drinking hells, and then s»,ep on the Bench and lino and imprison the poor, silly people who buy the drink and use it, and in using it, get drunk. Is it to be expected that the people will reform them habits of intemperance while drink sellers, drink users, and hotel masons are sitting in judgment on them? Again, ia it to he expected that tho police will be able to effect any reform while the interests, the tastes, and ia.

olmfttlcma of the presiding Justices are altogether ■wit U the publican 7 Suppose a ease i If Dan White obtains a license for his intended hotel at Ravensbourno. and a policeman catches him selling on Sunday and brings the case to the Police Court, and Eso., is on the Bench, will Dan White be fined, or ll' fined at all, will the fine be a hsltty one ? If Dan Whits gets a license, wo expect he wil. g‘t hie brandy from Mr Birch—he will, it ho is not an uiuratcfttl man; and if n mao gets locked up for drinking Mr Birch's brandy, will it be justice for Mr Birch to send that man to prison, While he h.is the price of the man’s drunkenness in his own pocket ? It is time, quite time, that this sort of thing Wel'o put on end to. Those who administer the law should not pocket the gaius arising from the breaches thereof, neither should they lay foundation stones for buildings which ore notoriously prolific of crime. Wo look Upon Mr Birch’s action at Ravensbourne as highly discreditable to the Bench of which he forms a part, and we hope the Government will show their disapproval of his conduct by removing him from the 801 l of du slices of the Peace. In making these remarks we entirely disclaim b?i> g actuated by any feelings of personal hostili y to Mr Birch) on the contrary, we have always regarded him in a friendly manner, but personal consideration must not, shall not, stand in our way in upholding common rights and public consistency.

The defendant pleaded that the matters stated in the article were true, and that the comments were fair ones.

Mr E. Cook appeared for the plaintiff, and Mr Stewart for the defence.

The following evidence was taken : The plaintiff deposed that he was a Justice of the Peace, aud had resided in Otago for twenty-four years. He had been Mayor of Dunedin three times. He had read the article complained of, and denied that he had laid the foundation-stone of an hotel as stated, but he assisted to do so. He and a few friends went down to Bavensbourne on the invitation of Mr D. White, Some champagne was drunk upon this occasion, and sandwiches were also consumed. He was not aware that the law was broken. The whole of the article, subject to such exceptions as that he was a carpenter, was untrue. He did not enter into a compact with Dan White to supply him with brandy. To Mr Stewart: He admitted that the report of the proceedings as they appeared in the * Licensed Victuallers’ Gazette ’ was a true one. He did not know that before going down there was to be a formal opening of Bavensbourne House. The invitations were of a general character, and several toasts were proposed. He did not consider it undignified for him to preside over the meeting, but he was not there in his capacity of Justice of the Peace, but as a private citizen. He was not aware that a large portion of the inhabitants of Baveusboume were opposed to the establishment of an hotel there. He did' not know that another Justice of the ir’eace had refused the invitation, nor that his own conduct was unfavorably commented upon by his brother J.P.’s. He was not a teetotaller, and whether he was fond of a glass of whisky had nothing to do with the case. He considered it quite consistent with his position as a Justice of the Peace to be present at the meeting referred to, and no consideration would induce him to dissever himself from his friends, or prevent him from exorcising the judgment which God had given him. His interests, but not his tastes and indications, were with publicans. Ho patronised publicans occasionally, and pitied them. He drank as much champagne as he could get, and also sang happy songs from the same sense of pity. In proposing the toast of “The Licensed Vic.uailers’ Gazette,” and wishing it success, he did so from a similar sense of commiseration.

James Marshall, brewer, and James Finch were also examined, but their testimony was of no general interest.

This was all the evidence. Counsel then addressed the jury, and his Honor summed U P-. _

The Jury after a short deliberation returned a verdict for the defendant on all the issues.

The Court then adjourned till Thursday next.