LICENSING COURT.

Globe, Volume XXII, Issue 1969, 16 June 1880, Page 3

LICENSING COURT.

CHRISTCHURCH. Tuesday, June 15. [Before G. L, Mellish, Esq., Chairman ; G. L. Lee and R. J. S. Harman, Esqe., Commissioners.] The following is the conclusion of the proceedings re licensing Barrett’s Hotel. 'Xho commencement of the case was given in our yesterday’s issue : Mr Joynt then submitted a memorial on Barrett’s behalf, and which, ho pointed out, bore the signatures of a number of influential and respectable persons. The memorial was handed to the Bench for perusal. Mr Scott asked to be allowed to call a witness. Mr Joynt objected. Mr Mellish asked if the police had any information of a probable attack before the day. Mr O’Donnell said he was not in Christchurch at the time, but had heard that something was known of it. Detective O’Connor was sworn—Ho said he heard something of a probable attack three days before Boxing Day. His informant said simply, “ The Orange procession are going to walk and we are going to assault them.” Mr Joynt—Did you put Mr Barrett on his guard ? Witness —I did not.

Mr Joynt—Had you any reason for thinkig Mr Barrett was going to be in tho row ? Witness—No.

Mr Joynt—Had you any reason for thinking it was to be connected with Mr Barrett’s house ?

Witness—l had not, and made light of the affair, thinking it was not likely to take place. Mr Joynt—Have you since had occasion to believe that Mr Barrett was any way connected with that movement ? Witness —No ; I have not. This concluded tho evidence.

Mr Scott explained that he appeared on behalf of tho society whose procession was stopped and other objectors, and then addressed the Court.

Mr Joynt replied. The Court then adjourned for a quarter of an hour. On resuming, Mr Mellish announced the decision of the Bench. He said the only point on which, when they retired, the Bench had not made up their minds was as to whether or not tho license should be taken away absolutely from the house. They had decided not to adopt that course, but at the same time they had decided on the evidence that the present licensee was not a person fitted to hold a license. They were therefore prepared to meet the matter by granting the license conditionally on Mr Barrett undertaking to transfer it to some other person within a time to be fixed, unless Mr Joynt could suggest any other way to meet the case. The Bauch wore desirous not to throw any difficulties in the way, and were prepared to grant the license pro forma, on condition that he ceased to have all connection with the house. Mr Joynt asked whether the Bench meant that he should simply cease to be manager of the house. He did not understand them to mean that Mr Barrett must not be the owner of the property. Tho Bench did not contemplate going so far as that, but wished to bo distinctly understood that no half measures would do. Mr Barrett must absolutely lease tho property. The Bench would not recognise him as manager. Mr Joynt pointed out that the property was valuable, that Mr Barrett had a great deal at stake, and asked for time to enable him to dispose of the house —say till the next quarterly meeting of tho Court. After some further discussion, Mr Mellish said the Bench would make an order giving Mr Barrett one month from the Ist of July to dispose of the house. On these conditions the license was granted. The Court then adjourned for a fortnight.