SALVATION ARMY NOISES.

Auckland Star, Volume XLVII, Issue 66, 17 March 1916, Page 3

SALVATION ARMY NOISES.

IMPdRTAWT JUDGMENT GIVEN. INJUNCTION AGAINST RAND AND CLAPPING. I ADELAIDE, March 4. A judgment of great importance to the Salvation Army -was given by the Full Court to-day in the c&se of C. McKcnzie veraua Adjutant Powley, F. Henstridgc and A. dark, officers of the Mount Gambier Salvation Army. The plaintiff, -who resides near the Army hall, sued for £500 damages, and sought to restrain f;he defendants from continuing to play their band, eing. clap lhands and stamp their feet in such a manner .-us to interfere with his comfort and to reduce the value of his property. The Chief Justice said this seemed to be the first occasion on which legal pro ccedinge had been instituted with respect to the sounds emanating from a religious service. The effects described were that t'lie plaintiff and hie son were wakened up by. the service at 7 a.m. on Sundays, ■when einging took place, and the sounds which proceeded from other services and band practice were so detracting that it wae impossible to converse with reasonable comfort inside iplaintifTa house. Plaintiff, however, was entitled by law to be protected in the enjoyment of hie dwelling house.

As far as the singing in the Salvation Army hall wae concerned, apart fronT Uβ adjuncts of band playing, band clapping and the like, there was nothing in the evidence to show that it was of unusual character. If it caused discomfort in the plaintiff's house he must submit to it, and hie Honor was not prepared to hold, as he was invited to do, that those who did not attend such services had a right to lie in bed on Sunday mornings undisturbed by the sounds that arose from them. The .-playing of the band appeared to be a different matter. The Army hall was less than 20 feet away from" plaintiff's house, and -when plaintiff naid that even conversation with reasonable comfort was prevented, lie had no difficulty in believing it. That occurred for substantial periods every Sunday, and at intervals between 8 and 0.30 on most week nights. Thie amounted to a nuieance. Hand clapping "was undoubtedly an unusual incident of devotional, service. In the present case it was occasionally made use of to mark time in einjring. thus' rendering' unreasonable and objectionable What would otherwise be innocuous. It was a nuisance, and ehould also be prohibited. The injunction would require defendants to abate the nuisance, but ■would not otherwise interfere with their form of worship. The order would be that they be re«trained from doing any of the following thinge upon fhc premism of the Salvation Army, described in the statement of claim, in euch a manner as to occasion any nuisance or injury to plaintiff.'viz:— (1) Band playing, either with or without the accompaniment of singing; (2) band .practice; (3) clapping of hands; and (4) shouting ejaculations. Whether these thinpß would have to be abandoned altozethcr he wae not prepared to say. Pcrhai* some modifications of the building mifht be effected which would avoid the necessity, but defendants would be well advised not to indulce in experiments without fclw> concurrence of plaintiff. The Tilaintiff was not entitled to recover anything for depreciation in the value of his property. Imt was entitled to some damaece. The sum of 40/, usually awarded fot nominal damages, would be sufficient.