LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 5, Issue 1549, 19 September 1912, Page 2

LAW REPORTS.

LOWER COURT. (Before Mr. AY. G. Riddell, S.M.) MRS- BENNETT'S AT NEWTOWN. CONSTABLES ENTER.' WHAT THEY SAY THEY FOUNDTwo casea in which a good deal of interest was taken were heard in the Magistrate's Court yesterday, when Gertrude .Bennett, restaurant-keeper, of 202 Eiddiford Street,.Newtown, was charged with having kept liquor for sale within the Wellington South No-License district, oucl with being tho keeper of. premises, in a No-Licenso district, maintained as a place of resort for tho consumption of intoxicating liquor.

Sergeant Matheson Goes In. Senior-Sergeant Matheson, of Wellington South Police Station, gave evidence that about 2.30 o'clock on the morning of September 7 lie had entered the premises of Mrs. Bennott. He had been admitted by a man named Scoones, to whom witness had said that he was in possession of a warrant entitling hira to search tho place for liquor. Constables Taylor, Willetts, and, Joss had accompanied witness. He had gone into tho dining-room, and had there seen seven men. Five of the men had been sitting round a table, and the other two had been sitting in chairs asleep and in a drunken oondition. Scoones had informed the sergeant that Mrs. Bennett had gone to bed, and that he was acting for her and.was in charge. In a. recess under the staircase the sergeant had found 21 quart bottles of beer, which Scoones had said belonged to Mrs. Bennett. Witness had continued the search into tho Idtchen, where he h"ad found ai empty whisky bottle and a demijohn with about a gallon of beer in it. There were also a number of glasses there. In the back yard, near the dog kennel, ho'.hart found a bottle containing whisky, and in an outhouse seven empty whisky bottles, somo of which had smelt freshly of whisky.

Statements alleged to have been made to the police by Mrs. Bennett and Scoones were then read. The sergeant wont on to stato that in consequence of complaints the premises had .been under observation nightly for three months.

"All Tramway Men But One," Mr. Myers: Mrs. Bennett, I think, keeps a shop—a restaurant and tea-room? Witness:. Yes. And it is frequented a good .deal by tramway men?—r'Yes." . Dou't yon know that tramwaymen are in the habit of going thero for supper after working late?— Yes." And is it not a fact that "nil these men ■were tramwaymen ?—"All, with one exception." • t'ho sergeant added that the exception had been a tramway employee. He said, also, that the men who had been awakened were under the influence of liquor. . Mr, Myors: Are yon certain of that?— "Yes. I told them that at tho time."

Well, even if they were, you did not seetheni go. in?—" No."

■' -And- they might have gono there under the influence of liquor ?—"Yes."

To the Lawyer—"l : Have Formed My Own Conclusions." Constable Taylor gave ovidence as to what he had seen on tho night of tho , ..7th. .» Mr. Myers: Are yon sure that this man ; .'whom you describe as being asleep was ..under the influence of liquor? ■'fWitness: That is my opinion. : He had to be shaken up, you say?—"Ho Was very .hazy when ho awoke, and exclaimed: 'What! What! What! ,What! What!'" '".', ■"'.'. . " ■'; Exactly. If a man ,was. very tired, and he was suddenly awakened; might he not behave like .that? —"He''would be very tired indeed. And, besides, thero was the manner'in which he'said it."- • You are' not drunk,.and you have said it as he did?—" Well, right or wrong, I have formed my own conclusions." Other Police Evidence. • Constable Willetts, in the courso of his evidence, stated that sis out of tho seven men found on Mrs. Bennett's premises were married men. On variolis occasions when ho had had tho place under observation, ho had seen men come away from it in the. early hours of the morning. On one occasion he had met a man who had said that he had como from Mrs. Bennett's, and that it had cost him £1 for drinks. The man had at that time .been under tho influence of liquor. Witness had never actually seen anyone under tho influence of liquor come out of Bennett's. Mr. Myers strongly objected to a police officer introducing as evidence of fact a statement which had not como to his knowledge first-hand. Constable Joss also deposed as to having had the premises under observation. He said that on various occasions he had soon men leave the place after midnight. On one occasion six men, who walked unsteadily, had left by the side gate. , The Style of Defence. Mr. Myers submitted that both cases should be dismissed. The most which could'bo said for the prosecution was that' thero were some circumstances which might be suspicious. There was absolutely no evidence to the effect that Mrs. Bennett had kept liquor for sale on September 7. Neither had the police adduced any ovidence to sustain the other charge.

Supper and Musical Evenings. A large number of witnesses was railed by. tho defendant. Six of thoso who had been on the premises when tho police raided tho place swore'that they had gone to the shop for supper at about midnight, and had afterwards played cards and talkod. They said that they had never bought drink there. Four other witnesses, three of whom were women, deposed that they had been in the habit of going to Mrs. Bennett's for musical evenings, and that on these occasions there had always been "liquor" offered at supper time 'to' anyone who preferred it fii other drink. His Worship reserved decision. He siud that'ho wished to look Over the evidence, because there appeared to be contradictory statements. Scoones Charged. A case was called in which Henry Albert Scoones was charged with having taken part in the care of Mrs. Bennett's nremises, but it was not heard. Mrs Bennott's ease occupied the whole day. Staples and Co. and Mrs. Bennett's Beer Order. Thomas Madden, secretary of tho Staples Brewery Co., was charged with having failed to send at the proper time a notice to the Clerk of tho Court respecting liquor which had been sent to Gertrude Bennett, who lived in a NoLicense, district. ■Sub-Inspector Sheehan, stated that on September G the Staples Company had received ah order from Mrs. Bennett for four gallons Of beer, and the beer had been delivered that day. Tho Clerk of the Court had not received the n itice until September 9. Mr. A. Gray, counsel for 1 tho defendant company, said that the omission of a clerk to post the company's letter m the evening of Friday, September 6, had fcoeh, in a sense, responsible for the demy in' the notice leaching the clerk. When the clerk had found on tho Saturday morning that the letters w J ere still in the pigeon-hole, he had taken them to n nearby pillar-box, and had posted them at about 9 o'clock. This- letter-box was cleared at 9.1 a a.m., and the Post Office had said that the letters from it would bo in the private bows at about 10 a.m. So, had the Court officials made norc than an earlv morning clearance- of the Court letter-box the notice would have been received on Saturday morning, instead of Monday, and that would "probably have been accepted n* satisfactory. Tho defendant company m lined *«Cl, rittt aosts lit

OTHER CASES. Hazel Stanley was Fcntenced to one month's imprisonment for having importuned passers-by in a public thoroughfare. For insobriety, John Madden was sentenced to ono month's imprisonment. Reginald Carlylo Trcmbath was convicted for the theft of postal notes to the vnliio of £6 '55., and was ordered to appear for sentence when called on. SUPREME COURT: