Devon Quarter Session: Second Court: Yesterday: Before Prebendary Karslake and J. E. C. Walkey, and W. T. Bridges, Esqs. … Harriet Elizabeth Tippet v. The Justices of Stanborough and Coleridge: This was an appeal under the Licensing Act. Mr. Pitt-Lewis and Hon. C. Vivian (instructed by Messrs. Windeatt, of Totnes), for the appellant; Mr. Clark and Mr. Mortimer (instructed by Messrs. Hooper and Michelmore of Newton) for the respondent. Mr. Pitt-Lewis said this was an appeal against the refusal of county magistrates sitting at Totnes to grant the transfer of the Bridge Inn, Littlehempstone, to the appellant after the death of her father. The house was built 35 years ago by Thomas Tippett, and he there carried on the business of an Innkeeper until the spring of this year, when he died. Application was subsequently made to transfer the licence to the daughter, but that application was refused … …
Mr. Clark, in addressing the Court for the respondents, said the Justices unanimously refused the license, and these gentlemen had the advantage of their own local knowledge in addition to the evidence of the witnesses before them. He did not say they allowed this to bias their minds, but when a case came before the justices, they could not exclude this knowledge from their decision. The only witness called at the first hearing besides the appellant was Mr. Pinsent, a brewer, and who no doubt had an interest in the house, although Miss Tippett denied that he was the owner, or that she was bound to him. It was rather remarkable that Mr. Pinsent was not called today. If he had been they would have found what were the real facts of the case: [Mr. Pitt-Lewis said he was quite ready to call Mr. Pinsent at once if his friend desired it]. There was no doubt he desired to use this house as an adjunct to his own trade. As a matter of fact, he contended that the public wants of the locality did not render the continuation of the license necessary. If the license was withdrawn the property would not be injured, for in the place of a roadside pothouse, they would have two useful cottages … … The Chairman, after the Bench had consulted for about ten minutes, said they had already decided that the justices had discretion and the only point left was whether the renewal of the license should have been refused. … After considering this evidence the Court was unanimously of the opinion that the decision of the justices below must be quashed; the evidence showed the Inn to be a necessity and the license should be transferred.
[see also Western Times: Friday 6th July 1877]
Transcribed in whole or part from scanned originals: Presented with or without modified text and punctuation. For absolute accuracy refer to the original newspapers. Source: The British Newspaper Archive.
Referenced
GRO0518 Devonport: John Ball Pinsent: 1819 – 1901