RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lyttelton Times, Volume VI, Issue 385, 12 July 1856, Page 7

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Lyttblton, Sat., Jut.t 5. The Public House Ordinance. Messrs. Davis, Heaphv, and Scotf, hotelkeepers in ihis town, were summoned before the Resident Magistrate, on information laid against them hy the sergeant of police, for keeping open houses after 11 o'clock at night. The ease against Mr. Davis was tried by agreement to determine ail the charges. The fact was not disputed hy the delendant, but as the question, arose out of ait improper construction of the law of the case, we shall take ibis opportunity of explaining it.. It will be ivmembered that the " Public House Bill" was introduced into the Council in March last, but had not passed into law when the time arrived (the first week in April) for granting licenses for the current year. Licenses under the previously existing law «ere, therefore, granted as usual; and a provision was introduced into the ordinance, that I that portion of it which related to the management of public houses, (including the penalties connected therewith), should come into operation on the Ist July, hist, ; the time of year when the license itself begins to take effect: but that the operation of that portion which relates to tho system of issuing licenses should be deferred until the Ist of Apiil in next year. In other words, licenses granted in the form provided by the old law are to be construed as if grunted under the provisions of the new. Qs|The old licenses were of two classes—for tea o'clock, costing £30; and lor twelve o'clock, costing £40. The new form of license is for [ eleven o'clock, and costs £30. It appears that s«me Hotel-keepers applied, as formerly, for twelve o'clock licenses; and, receiving them, on the first of July, paid their £'40. Naturally enough, the publicans in question continued to keep their houses open until after eleven p.m., and were accordingly summonsed as above-men-tioned. The Resident Magistrate pointed out the actual state of the law on the poiut, and stated that he was prepared to enforce its provisions. On a demand from Mr. Davis that the question should he referred to the Judge of the Supreme Court ; the Resident Magistrate said that it was for the Court to consider for itself in what cases it would be advisable to reserve judgment Hn ordbi1 to take the opinion of a judsje. My. Gresson v.xifl he had seen the Judge opposite the Court. The Resident Magistrate said he shouM. in order to satisfy the defendants, have no objection to ask a conference with His Honor the Judge, and postponed he casrt fora few minutes, for that purpose. On the return of the R. M. into Court, Mr. Gresson explained tbe view of the law which the Government took, and pressed for a conviction. Mr. Davis submitted his case at some length, expressing his belief that the ordinance could not come into operation till July 1557. The Resident Magistrate said that the Court was perfectly agreed upon the ease ; he would »ive j figment against the defendants, and fine them in the nominal amount of one shilling. Mr. Davis desired that a larger penalty might be inflicted in his case, in order that an appeal mijiht lie. The Resident Magistrate acquiesced ; fined £5. Mr. Geksson watched the case on behalf of the Ciown. 'I"he case excite;' v s >ry great interest, and the Court was crowded during the whole of tbe proceedings.