HARRIERS

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 75, Issue 179, 1 August 1932, Page 11

HARRIERS

WANGANH CLUB WEEKLY RUN OUT FIVE MILES AT ARAMOHO At the invitatiOß of Mr. and Mr a. W. Jury the members of the Wanganui Harrier Club held their weekly rua from the Aramoho Boating Club shed on Saturday and were entertained to afternoon tea by their hoeta. After a five-mile run, three ntilee of which were controlled bv the captain’s whistle, C. Weller ran Tiome first and Showed splendid form. The run was of a light nature aftor the strenuous exertions of last week at Masterton. though the participants kept in view the Wert Coast crosscountry championship which is to be held on August 18, and travelled quickly and well. Further details will be given in Wednesday’s notes. BAPTISTS AT VARIANCE CHURCH PROPERTY COMTBO9 DIFFERENCE AT NAPIER NAPIER. July M The hearing of an application fo» an injunction to restrain a transfer of property in connection with the Baptist Church at Napier will take place during the Napier session of the Supreme Court, which eommencee on August 8. This is in accordance with a judgment given in Wellington bvj Mr. Justice Ostler. Plaintiffs. Sidney Smith aad ethers, members of the cliurch. filed an application for an injunction against the minister and officers of the church and against the Baptist Union of New Zealand. The circumstances were that plaintiffs claimed that they had been wrongly excluded from the church and had not been allowed to exercise ; their votes on certain resolutions deal ing with the property and control of the church. The Baptist Union was a necessary party to the action, because it was the trustee of the ehurch property at Napier, and one of the remedies sought by plaintiffs was an injunction to restrain them from transferring the property to the other defendants. As the office of the Baptist Union is more than 100 miles from Napier, the number of days after tbs expiration of which the defendant J were required to attend at Napier ts answer plaintiffs' claim was 28. Action One Day Laba The action was one day late for the sitting commencing on August 8. and plaintiff claimed that they were expelled meanwhile from any voice in the management of the church and asked for relief, which only the Supreme Court could give* by permitting the trial to be set down for the next silting at Napier. Otherwise the hearing could not take place until the November sittings, during which time tha plaintiffs would still suffer from the alleged disability. The application was nov opposed by the Baptist Union, but the other defendants. Oswald Machattie and others, objected on the grounds (1) that there will not be sufficient time to prepare for trial before the next sittings; (2) that defendants do not desire the Court to adjudicate on the question, but prefer that the differences between the parties should be settled by u. Baptist conference, which is to in New Zealand early in October; (3) that defendants wish to call as a witness Dr. Rushbrook, an eminent Baptist divine, who is coming from England to attend that conference. The Baptist Union was anxious to have the controversy settled by the Court and not brought before the conference, as the conference had no power to do anything mure than to advise the parties. The union was anxious that the trial should take place at the next sittings, and joined in asking that the order asked for be made.

Dispute Not One of Doctrine. His Honuur cited eases to show that the Court had power to make the order asked for. The criminal cases first had to be dealt with, and if that did not allow the defence sufficient time it could be heard after the conclusion of the Gisborne sittings, which would give defendants four weeks. The conference could not settle the only the Court could do that. The dispute was not ono of doctrine, but of principle or management, and if the ord#*r was made defendants would not. be prejudiced thereby. Ff plaintiffs were right, why should their wrongful exclusion extend for a further three months? If their claim proved invalid the objecting defendants could not b® prejudiced by an earlier judgment tb that effect.

His Honour granted the order a-ked for, and further ordered that defendants other than the Baptist Union defend the action ou behalf of themselves and all other members of the Napier Baptist Church to the intent that the judgment shall bind all the members of that church. The questio® of costs was reserved.