DURING EPIDEMIC TIME

Dominion, Volume 12, Issue 71, 18 December 1918, Page 6

DURING EPIDEMIC TIME

BREACH OF THE LICENSING ACT.

An unusual prosecution under the Licensing Act was heard by Mr. F. v. Frazer, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday, when Brer Otto Englundu, licensee of the Britannia Hotel, was charged with refusing to'aitord to Charles William Lopdell, a police sergeant, imme-. diate entrance to a bar parlour in which it was suspected that an offence was being committed, and James Frew and John Alfred Norling were charged with being found on licensed premises alter hours. , The police case, which was conducted by Inspector Marsack, was that Sergeant Lopdell and a constable entered the hotel on November 23 at 6.15 p.m., and saw the licensee standing in the passage way near the tar parlour.' Shadows of persons in the bar parlour were reflected on the glass door of the parlour, and the police desired to satisfy themselves as to their conduct, but thel licensee emit the door and refused them admittance. All hotels were'obliged to remain'closed by order of the Health Department owing to the epidemic, and the sale of liquor was forbidden. Frew and Norling were arrested in a right-of-way, and both had said that they had gone to the hotel to try and get a drink, as they had been engaged In relief work in connection with the epidemic. On behalf of Englundh Mr. T. Young submitted that he was entitled to missal, as the prosecution had failed to show that Sergeant Lopdelhhad reasonable cause to suspect that an oftence under the Licensing Act was being committed. Action taken under the .provisions of the order made by the Health .Officer had failed, as the instructions were'found not to be strictly according to law. Englundh had not refused the police admission. Neither tho constable nor the sorgeant had demanded admission, as policethey simply rattled on the idoor. Englundh stilted that Norling and Frew had come to the hotel to see him as friends, and neither was served with drink. He had merely closed the pan lour door whilst he went to the kitchen". Mr. H. F. O'Leary, who appeared tor both Norling and Frew, stated that one of the men had visited the hotel to eee the proprietor and the other to (obtain tea. ■' ' ' , ' ' His. Worship was" satisfied that Lng : lundh had refused admittance to the police; and entered'a conviction accordingly, as well as imposing a fine; of and costs 7s. Frew and Norling were also convicted and fined £1 each, with costs 7s.