HOTEL CASES DECIDED.

Dominion, Volume 7, Issue 1937, 20 December 1913, Page 6

HOTEL CASES DECIDED.

SMALL PENALTIES IMPOSED. LAW POINT OF INTEREST. STANDING OR DAILY ORDCR? Decision wass giveii'f.by ' Mr. - W. ; - G. Riddell, S;M., . in. the Magistrate's Court 'yesterday "respecting tlio. cases arising'out of-the',, enforced.closing of - all hotels within\iho City , limits during a certain pcriod-'of' tho. strike.' Tlio referred to the caso'of;-Daniel :; Bii'cldey,. licensee of tlio Foresters' Arms Hotel,' who was recently charged .with keeping 1 his premises open on.'November-20, during such time as they /wore directed to' bo closed in /pursuance.,, of Section 284 of the Licensing ■Act,'/under an order made by two Justices of the Pence, the Mayor oi Wellington, Mr. J. P. Luke, and tlio Town Clerk;-,Mr./J.■>R. Palmer.' Counsel for .the. defence, Miv'lV Young, had raised two grounds of defence: (1) That the order mode, by tho-Justices was invalid, as.:.it- merely.-expressed: ; - tlio opinion of the Justices as to the state of affairs in tho city/, and this opinion was formed without evidenco. as .to whether a tumult was likely to happen at or near.defendant's premises on tho date ■ named.'■■ ■■■ Traversing .this' contention, the Magistrate said that, while it was admitted that a considerable interval of time had elapsed between tho making of tho order and its coming into operation, nevertheless it was common knowledge that a striko of waterside workers was in-progress, and. that matters generally-were in a disturbed state, although no actual tumult had taken place for., some'. days.,' Therefore, although there might bo doubt as to tho validity, of the order, ho did not think that tho Court had. jurisdiction to review it. 1 -j ■ ■

Counsel's second abjection had been that there was. 110 evidence- that notico of the' order- had been properly served on defendant.'■■■" The answer to this objection," commented Ilis" Worship, "is that' cvidcnco has been-given to show that-tho. order was .complete when itwas issued by "tlio Justices; that a messenger delivered it to tho defendant on November 19, and 110 (tho licensee) admits '-.receivingit. I think that theso facts ' show that the ordcf was sufficiently, brought ,:-to defendant's knowledge." - : As ; : lio " admits / keeping his promises open and selling liquor, ho must be Tho defendant was accordingly lined 205., with costs 7s. . Should tt Have Bean Day by Day? Questioned .by tho. Magistrate, Mr. Young said ho did not suppose that defendant would- think an appeal worth while. An" interesting law. joint was involved, however, and in easo his client should desire ■■ to : havo.. tho ■ matter thrashed cut in' a, higher court, counsel asked that Security' for appeal be fixed. Tho. magistrate stated. that h-o was inclined .to the opinion ■ that tho order of the Justices should havo been made as to .each particular, day. . Ho would like very much to seo an appeal lodged and a ruling given 011 tho validity or otherwise of the order,../Sccuritv for-appeal was fixed, in tho sum of i' 7 7s. . Tho City Hotel Case ■" Regarding the caso of John '■ James Firth, licensee'of tho City Hotel, who was'similarly charged, in addition to tho objections raised-by counsel in the caso against Buckley, Mr. Blair (counsel for tho defendant) had argued 011 the day of hearing that jio evidence could bo given to prove the order or its service, bocauso no - notico to produce had been given to tho defendant;:. In tlio course of his judgment, -tho .' magissrato ..commented that' the evidence given was admissible without ;t notico to produced/Notice to ■p'roduco was .not .necessary 'when v - tiie document to bo proved was itself a notice which had been served cu. tho opposite party; Further, there wm ovidenco ■that tho'notico liad" been served 011 tho defendant's wife, and that it- came to his knowledge during tho afternoon of November "JO, and in consequesicc his hotel was practically closed during the fol-lowing-day...■■'Tho defendant, admitted, however,' that' several men wero in tho liotel, and were:.supplied with liquor on November L'l. . A conviction must bo entered and a fine of 205.,-with cost-s /s., was imposed. . : '--C; r

Emplra Hotel Case, With regard to the enso against- Fanny Pool, licenseo..of .the, Empire Hotel, the magistrate.-in a verbal judgment, com..».nfnrl that Jiis decision touching tlie validity of tho order and tho other points raised Nvas:.tlio. samo as in the prceedmg eases/' lli>: therefore convicted the delondnnt and imposed' a iino.qf iOs., with