SUPPLYING LIQUOR

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 123, 16 February 1918, Page 9

SUPPLYING LIQUOR

TO MEN IN UNIFORM A POLICE CASE DISMISSED Reserved judgment) was delivered in the iUagibtralo's Court yesterday by Mr. S. ji. Ml'arthy, ri.M., in clio case ot tile i'ulicu v. iNicholas .Berg. The information alleged that the defendant supplied to 0110 Allan Morrison, a member of the Defence Forces, when in uniform, intoxicating liquor lor consumption elsewhere than on the premises wlieto it was supplied, contrary to yje War Regulations. In his vjdsivaeiit tuc defendant, who is a ccrri;-:- sua driver of an omnibus, carried with him on January 20, 11)18, from Pctonc to Day's L\v, in the body of his 'bus, a bug containing threo bottles of beer. IKe defendant pulled up his 'bus at the pavilion in Williams Park, a public recreation ground. Quite evidently Morrison expected to see the defendant, and the defendant to soo Morrison, for there had been previous meetings between the two at the same place and for tlio same object. Immediately on arrival at tlio pavilion defendant told Morrison lie would find a bag in tlie body of the 'bus. Morrison obtained the beer and carried it to,the bush some distance away, and was followed by two other men in uniform. The three men wero inmates of tlio Lowry Bay Military Hospital. Two plain-clothes constables followed the men, took possession of the bap and the bottles of beer. It was alleged that tlio beer was a gift to tlis soldiers, who, it was stated, had. been members of the Expeditionary Forces, but had been discharged. Moreover, not one of the three were a'l the date in question enrolled in tlio Defence Forces. The Magistrate said there wero three points for decision:— (1) Were Morrison and N'.'ttinghani on January L'O last members of either the Expeditionary or tlw Defenco Force? (2) Is Williams Park "premises" within the meaning of the Regulations cited ? SWas the intoxicating liquor supfor consumption elsewhere than on the promises where it was supplied within the meaning of Regulation 2. As to the first question tlio mere fact that three soldiers wero each wearing tho King's uniform J'd not_ make them members of tho Expeditionary Forces, and this really settles the whole question. As to the second question, the term "premises" included place.-; where sales of liquor were possible. If sales uwe effected otherwise than on premises and by persons duly licensed, the sales would he unlawful, but such sales, whether lawful or unlawful, would subject the seller to the additional penalty provided for if the liquor sold was intended for consumption otherwise than at the place of sale.' As to the third point. Williams Pari; was the premises whereon tlif supply of intoxicating liquor was made, and on those premises the liquor was ✓onSlimed and intended by tlio parties to be consumed. Concluding, His Worship said: "If it is desirable to make it unlawful for members of either the Defenoo or Expeditionary Forces to be supplied with alcoholic liquor whilst under medical treatment, there should be an express regulation to this effect In my opinion tho supply havinc been made at Williams Park for consumption thereon no offencc has been committed, and the information will I>p dismissed" At the hoarinjr Mr. E. P. Bunny appeared for the defendant.