RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Ashburton Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 1048, 14 September 1883, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

ASHBURTON—To Day. t (Before H. C. S. Baddeley Esq, R.M.) 1 CIVIL CASES. , 1 Judgment went by default in the fol- ' lowing cases : Atkinson’s trustees v. ' Daly, L 3 18s, the defendant being ordered to pay the amount in fortnightly instal- ’ ments of 10s each ; Matson, Cox and Co. v. Taylor, claim LI 4s ; Martin v. Cash- 1 mere, claim L 3 13s lid ; same v. Metcalf claim, L 6 6s 8d ; same v. Findlay, Ll 3 ( 9s 91; Nicholson v. McKenzie, claim ( LI sa. 1 Breach of the Licensing Act. —F. L. Hill was charged with having committed ' a breach of the Licensing Act, inasmuch as he permitted a game of billiards to be played on his premises on the night of Sept. 1 within prohibited hours. Sergeant Felton conducted the prosecution, and Mr Wilding appeared on behalf of the defendant. —Mr Wilding said that he did not care to raise preliminary objections, but he had one to point out in this instance which he thought was fatal. The information, he contended, did not disclose any offence whatever. Mr Hill was charged with having allowed a game of billiards to be played, but nothing was said as to where the game took place. Counsel was quite willing to have the case decided on its merits, and would ask the Court to hear the evidence, but at the same time he desired a note to be taken of his objection.—Sergeant Felton then called R. W. Shearman, who said he was the owner of the Somerset Hotel, which was held on lease for seven years by Mr Hill. He knew the bil-liard-room, which had formerly been used as a workmen’s bedroom. It formed part of the premises let to Mr Hill, and had always been licensed as part of the hotel. Admission was gained by means of a right-of-way from East street which was the property of the lessee. — The witness was not cross-examined. — Constable Smart said that according to instructions received he went, accompanied by two other constables, to the Somerset Hotel on the night of the Ist inst at abo it 11-30 o’clock. He found two men playing billiards in the billiard room, which was situated about fifteen or twenty yards fr m the gate in East street. There were five or six others there, but they simply onlookers.—To the Bench: The defendant held a ten o’clock license. Cross examined by Mr Wilding : Took a note of the time by Murray’s clock, and it was about 11.30 when he went to the hotel. Neither the marker, nor Mr Hill, nor anybody connected with the hotel were in the room. No drink was being served. —Edward Oughton, painter, gave evidence that he was playing in the billiard room a little after eleven o’clock on the night of Sept 1 He had formerly been a waiter at the hotel, but could not say if drinks had been served in the billiard room, which had no internal communication with the main building. Had himself never served drinks there. — Cross-examined : Neither Mr Hill nor-the marker were present. Believed that had the latter been in the room when witness arrived the game would not have been commenced. —At this stage ifTv Baddeley said he had been considering ths point raised by Mr Wilding, and had c ime to the conclusion that the information was ; faulty. The omission of any reference to ’ the pi ice where the billiard room was was fatal, as the game might have been played i anywhere. Under the circumstances, he must dismiss the case.—The information ; laid against Mr Quill was in the same form, and the Sergeant said that after the , decision of the Magistrate he would ask leave to withdraw it.—Mr Crisp, who appeared for Mr Quill, sai' tha. he had a strong point to raise in this case, namely, whether the owner of the hotel was liable for what took placa in the billiard room, over which he had no control, as it had been leased prior to the present Act coming into force. This point had never been decided in Canterbury, and he felt sure it , was a fatal one. [ The Court then adjourned.