NEW ZEALAND NEWS.

Taihape Daily Times, Volume 7, Issue 244, 5 July 1915, Page 8

NEW ZEALAND NEWS.

COUNCIL V. CLERGY. AN INTERESTING LAW CASE BEGUN. "When is a church not a church?" was ••the unusual and interesting point that Mr D. G. A. Cooper, S.M., was called upon "to decide in the Wellington Magistrate's Court. The Miramar | Borough Council proceeded aganist th e J Very Rev. Archdeacon Devoy, S.M., 'the Very Rev. Father Lewis, Coadjutor, j Archbishop O'Shea, D.D., and the Rev. John E. Ainsworth, S.M., as co-own-ers of a section of land at Miramar, to recover the sum of £l2 15/6 for rates due en the property. The claim | was resisted on the ground that the ■premises erected upon the land in [question were used for religious purposes, which afforded them an exemption under section 2 of the Rating Act f I£M)S, v/hilch Exempts from ' rates {.land occupied by churches and chapels. j Th e contention of the Miramar Coun. cil, for which Mr T Neave appeared, was that the premises in question did not come within the description of church or chapeL as the building was a four-roomed cottage, and that al- | though religious services weer admittedly held by the aCtholic clergy on !Sundays, y6t the premises were on i other occasions used as a dwelling- ! 'icuse, and also as a private school pond-acted for profit. Mr Neave said that the point fhs magistrate had j'o decide was "What a church?" j"f> submitted thst as there was no |'lefij\U.ton n ithc. Act Itself of what J was meant by a church or chapel, His Worship must decide on the common and literal meaning of the words used. In this sense an exemption could only be granted if the premises, in respect of which the exemption was claimed, could b e described as a church by reason of its ecclesiastical design in architecture or its being fitted up with the iusual appointments of a religious asisfimbly house. If the magistrate held that the land was exempted simply from the fact that religions services were conducted therein, then it would follow that every owner of a dwellinghouse who conducted family service hi his own house could, under that decision, claim an exemption from rating. After further argument the case was adjourned until Tuesday next, when the defence will be £'on e .into. Mr P. J, O'Regan represented the defendants. ' '';-:"« »-:-^w- : «IRjIfSJ