The Salvation Army.

Poverty Bay Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1347, 25 August 1883, Page 4

The Salvation Army.

IBE New Zealand Herald’s London Correspondent under date July 12, writes as follows:— The Salvation Army have just sustained a crushing defeat, not in the field, but in the law courts. The reputation of their chief has also been somewhat besmirched. Some months ago “ General" Booth purchased for £16,750 the lease of the Eagle Tavern and expended in improvements £8250 more. He covenanted to keep the Tavern as an inn, tavern, or publichouse, but as soon as he obtained possession, attempted to convert it into a temperance house or coffee palace. The trustees of the property applied for an injunction, which was refused chiefly on the strength of an affidavit made by the " General ’’ that he intended to transfer his interest in the Eagle to a firm of brewers. Mr Booth converted the Eagle into the headquarters of his mission. He declared that he could transform the premises “into a house of mercy,” and boasted that the Salvation Army would “ attract tens of thousands to the Eagle ” for religious purposes, “ who have drunk, danced, sworn, and served the Devil there.” The owners of the property declined to acquiesce in the financial ruin of the Tavern, and commenced an action to decide whether Mr Booth had broken bis covenant, and if he had, whether relief from the subsequent forfeiture could be granted to him under the Conveyancing Act of 1881. The Court has decided against Mr Booth upon both points. The Judge held that he could not relieve Mr Booth because the breach had not been remedied, and in fact could not be remedied. He also held that, having regard to “ the proceedings and conduct ” of Mr Booth, they had been such as to disentitle him to relief. The defendant had been wrong from first to last. He took the lease, intending from the first to evade one of its terms. He solemnly engaged to keep the Eagle Tavern as a publichouse, and he must have known what the substantial and fair meaning of these words was. He had tried to evade his obligation by an unsuccessful legal quibble. It was not honest.” The judgment also characterised the affidavit filed before Mr. Justice Kay as “ disingenuous, misleading, and framed in such a way as to lead to a false impression. The judgment, therefore, was that Mr. Booth had forfeited his lease and lost his £20,000. Mr. Booth’s comment is: “ The devil is against us everywhere.”