During the sitting of the Licensing Court yesterday afternoon Mr. Barton permitted himself to make a few remarks on the New Zealand Times in general, and an article referring to the Theatre Royal Hotel in particular. Some delicacy is really experienced in answering the remarks of Mr. Barton. Though our solicitors have not been favored by the service upon them of a writ from him, he has long ago threatened such service, and ample proof is' being afforded at present that. the seemingly natural resource of lawyers who take it into their heads that a newspaper has libelled them, is a writ for damages, coating them some ss. Writs in this respect may really be said at present to be Thick as autumnal leaves that strow the brooks . In Vallombrosa. Indeed, under the circumstances, the tendency I to say with Jack Cade, “Hang all lawyers,” is almost irresistible, ’ But as it is possible, to know nothing of “these nice sharp quillets of the law,” which make one seem to offend, and yet to have an honest intention and strict sense of justice, we shall, with every anxiety to “keep o’ the windy side of the law,” take the liberty of replying to Mr. Barton. That gentleman,’ in an outburst of forensic purity, objected to an article which some three months since appeared in the. New Zealand Times, and was descriptive of the Theatre Royal Hotel ; and furthermore, requested that some authority should be exercised to prevent this paper’s continuance in a course which he conceives detrimental to all principles of justice. It seems that in the article in question an idea was expressed that the objection to the granting ot Mr. Urwin’s license was unfair, and an opinion was also expressed that petitions either for or against the granting of any license were not reliable expressions of opinion. Mr. Barton seemed to consider that the Times dictated to the Licensing Bench, and implied that the opinions of the Times were of sufficient weight to carry conviction with them. We totally deny the former of these statements ; we are quite prepared to admit the truth of the latter. “ Mr. Barton wasted a good deal of virtuous indignation. The Bench very properly repudiated the notion of its members being influenced by newspaper comments; and its decision, founded on principles of justice, was quite in accord with the opinion of the New Zealand Times. As for Mr. Barton’s verbiage and nonsensical talk, making up as a whole what Lord Wbstburv called the decisions of a Scotch Lord, of Session, “melancholy collections of erroneous sentences,” are really beneath notice. We almost owe an apology to our readers for having taken the trouble to reply to Mr. Barton. An accurate reporter in an evening paper has said that he stigmatised the New Zealand Times as “a British journal.” We are content to remain under such a stigma. It is true that Mr. Barton did nothing of the kind, arid that, as will be seen by our report, ho was decidedly abusive and the reverse of-complimentary. It dees , not matter much. His abuse does not hurt;this compliments do no good. ... ..
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/NZTIM18770317.2.10
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4987, 17 March 1877, Page 2
Word count
Tapeke kupu
524Untitled New Zealand Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 4987, 17 March 1877, Page 2
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
No known copyright (New Zealand)
To the best of the National Library of New Zealand’s knowledge, under New Zealand law, there is no copyright in this item in New Zealand.
You can copy this item, share it, and post it on a blog or website. It can be modified, remixed and built upon. It can be used commercially. If reproducing this item, it is helpful to include the source.
For further information please refer to the Copyright guide.