CITY HOTEL & MASTERTON LIQUOR.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1675, 15 February 1913, Page 6

CITY HOTEL & MASTERTON LIQUOR.

(By Tdojroph.—Special Correspondent.) . Masterton, Febrnory 14; ' At > a sitting of the. Masterton B.MV. Court this morning, beforo Mr., L. Q, • Reid, S.M., Margaret M'Parland, licensee of the Hotel Cecil, Wellington, was charged with having failed to furnish the Clerk of the Court with a statoriicnt, in writing, of the nature and quantity of liquor ordered by Mary 'Hall, and intended b» be sent to Masterton, and of tho name and address of the person ordering - same and of tho person, by whom <. it was taken.

Another charge of a similar nature in respect to liquor ordorcd by; Alfred Langley was also (preferred against tho eanso defendant, ''■..; Tttugh Scanlon, of Wellington, was also charged that having, in compliance with an oraer received - from Mary Hall, 6old liquor to bo taken into the No-: License district of Masterton, he ; failed to furnish 'tho-Clerk of tho Court at Mas-, terten with a statement, in writing, of the nature and quantity of liquor so. taken, and of the name-and, address of the person ordering 6ame, and of tbe person by whom it was taken, A similar, charge in respect to liquor sold, to* Alfred Langley was' also preferred against • defendant. ■ ,■ ■ Mr. 8. J. Moran appeared for both defendants, and pWs of guilty wore Cute"!!. „ L 1_ The circumstances wero that' two per-/ som., Marr Hall and' Alfred Lauglcy, went into the Hotel Cecil in Wellington,' and, obtained' a dozen bottles of beer each,', which was taken to Mastorton. Scanlon, who was tho servant who hart supplied; tho beer, admitted that he had forgotten to make tho necessary declaration m regard to notifying tho Clerk of the Court, Sirs. M'Parland, it was stated, was an invalid, and could not personally attend to that business. Mr. Moran asked that in tho circumstances, the charge against defendant, M'Parland should bowitndrawn by the police. ' '■' ,• , r On tho first information against Mrs. M'Parland a conviction, with costs 135., was entered. The second charge was. withdrawn. Scanlon was fined 10b. and costs, tho second charg« against nun being withdrawn. ■ - ' - .-