The Sydenham Licensing Committee.

Manawatu Herald, 4 February 1893, Page 2

The Sydenham Licensing Committee.

WHAT THE JUDGES HAD TO SAY; In the byd-nham Prohibition case, the A. -peal Court unanimously dismissed the appeal of the Sydenhani Licensing Comraitte?. In the Sydenham appeal case the Chief Justice said the evidenoe led him to conclude the committee had acted on the general principle that under no circumstanced were licenses to be granted, without* Gon,. i sideration as to whether" -ia%particular cases they were feiflSire'a. Mr Justice Richmond said the;' Oomuiiitee mingled the zeal of reformers j with the passion of partiz&u. Justice Williams considered the faots showed that the appellants had made jro their minds beforehand. Justice 1 Connolly concurred. Leav« -was

ttbtained to appeal to' the Privy Council. , The Court of Appeal to-day unanimously dismissed the appeal of the Sydenham Licensing Conmifctee case, H. Isitt v. Quill with costs ou the highest scale. The Chief Jn3tice did not consider the lvfusn! of three renewals in 1892 which were granted in 1891, although there had been no change in the circum stances, sufficient ground for concluding that the Committee did not. proceed on a proper consideration of the matter. Certain expressions of opinion in the Court of \ppeal in a former case sufficiently accounted for this change of attitude, but a consideration of the evidence as a whole now led him to the conclusion that the Committee had acted on the general principle that under no circumstances ought licenses to be granted, and not upon a proper consideration of whether under tha particular circumstances the licenses in question were required. Mr Justice Richmond regretted to say that the facts together led him to the conclusion that the Committee had not fairly exercised any discretion, but that their action must be referred to previous pledges and notorious bias, fie had no wish to say anything to cause pain to persons endeavouring to abate an undoubted social evil, but in his opinion the appellants had mingled with the zeal of the reformers a little of the passion of patriotism. Without in the least impnting conscious perversion of the truth, he could not accept their exposition of their own motives. The invincible prejudice which blinded them as judges disqualified them as witnesses. The judgments of Mr Justice Williams and Mr Justice Connolly were read. Mr Justice Williams held that, looking at all the facts, beyond doubt the appellants had made up their minds beforehand, on the ground that the sale of all liquors was immortal and ought to be . prohibited, and had acted on a pre de termination. Mr Justice Connolly concurred in the judgements of Mr Justice Richmond and Mr Justice Williams. The Court considered the respondent entitled to the quashing of the refusal of his renewal. Whether he could get benefit beyond the control of the Court. Mr Atkinson obtained leave to appeal to the Privy. Council on the usual terms.