A LEGAL POINT

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 53, 31 August 1926, Page 11

A LEGAL POINT

APPEAL AGAINST A CONVICTION.

His Honour, Mr. Justice MacGregor, sittiug at the Supreme Court to-day, heard an appeal from the decision of Mr. E. Page, S.M., on the conviction of James M'Parland, licensee of the Hotel Cecil, on a charge of permitting drunkenness on his licensed premises.

The facts were that a drunken man was seen by the police to enter the middle bar of the Hotel Cecil. After an interval of some fourteen minutes, the police followed him into the hotel, and found him standing with his back against a bar in the hotel some distance away from where he entered. That was juat before 6 o'clock, and the bars were being cleared. One of the barmen explained to the sergeant of police that he had seen the man come in. about ten minutes previously; had refused to give him a drink, and had told him to get out. The man moved in the direction of (I-.' ''■;or, and the barman thought he had gone out. The barman did not see him on the premises again till the police arrived. The Magistrate held that the man must have been seen by other barmen as he had failed to go out when told to do so, and convicted the licensee. It was contended by the appellant that there was no evidence that there was any conscious permission from the barman for allowing the man to remain on the premises; that the barman did not know he was there; and that the prosecution had failed to show any knowledge on the part of either the barman or the licensee that the man was on the premises in a drunken condition. The respondent contended that the mere action of telling the man to leave was not sufficient, and that the barman should have taken further steps to have had him put out. (Proceeding.)