Kentish Gazette, 1 February 1876.

KENTISH CASES IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE.

THE MEETINGS OF FRIENDLY SOCIETIES AT PUBLIC HOUSES.

In the Appear Division of the High Court on Thursday last, the case of "Dalton v. the Justices of Kent," was heard.

Mr. Poland, who appeared on behalf of the appellant, said that in this case a question of considerable importance with regard to the meetings of friendly societies in public-houses, and one in which no decision had yet been given, was involved. The case came before the Court on the following state of facts:-

The appellant, William Dalton, was the secretary of a friendly society, which held their meetings at the "White Hart," at Snodland, in Kent, and consisted of 150 members. There was a meeting of the club at the "White Hart" on the evening of the 16th January, 1875, and the landlord called upon a constable to come into the house, stating that the society was holding a meeting there, it being then twenty minutes past ten, and the house having been closed at ten o'clock. It was admitted that no one in the house but those in the club room, out of which Dalton and ten others came, when the former stated to the constable that the business of the society had not concluded by the hour for closing. There was no pretence, however, on the information being laid before then, were of opinion that the appellant and those who were with him had not made out a case for remaining on licensed premises after the legal hour of closing, and they accordingly convicted the appellant under the 25th section of the 36th Vict., for which offence a penalty of 40s. may be imposed.

Mr. Justice Field:- I understand what the parties want is a decision on the question whether persons engaged as these, who may remain in a public-house after the lawful hours for closing, but whom no liquors have been supplied, are liable under the act. The question is stated most generally in this case.

Mr. Baron Cleasby:- We really cannot deal with a case of this kind, when the facts are that these people went to the inn with the professed intention of raising this very question.

Mr. Poland:- And they wilfully remained after the closing time.

Mr. Justice Field:- Yes, in order to get a legal opinion (laughter.)

Mr. Baron Cleasby:- And one on a sham case.

Mr. Poland submitted that that did not effect the validity of the conviction. The appellant had been fined one shilling in order that the question might be raised, and he had been either legally or illegally convicted. He would further submit, that as the same thing was of frequent occurrence the landlord might have been subjected to a substantial fine, and as he did not desire to turn the members of the club out he had adopted the course of calling in a policemen, so that the matter might be legally settled. It could not, therefore, be said that this was a sham case.

Mr. Justice Grove:- We do not say that the parties have not acted bona fide, but that the parties arranged the thing in order to obtain the decision of the Court.

After some further discussion their Lordships directed that the case should be sent back to be restated, Mr. Barrow, who appeared on the other side, assenting to this course being adopted.