WARNING BELLS

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 81, 2 October 1931, Page 9

WARNING BELLS

SYSTEM IN HOTEL

AFTER-HOURS TRADING

THE LAW FLOUTED

A system of warning bells operated from buttons under a window ledge outside the Prince of Wales Hotel was revealed by Sub-Inspector Lopdell in the course of his crossexamination of Samuel Lockhart Gilrner, licensee, who was charged at the Magistrate's Court to-day with selling liquor after hours. Gilmer frankly stated that he had been carrying on a regular after-hours trade, and that the bells were there to warn him when the police were coming. His barman, Robert Milne Stewart, at first said that the bells were obsolete and out of use, but afterwards stated that he had sometimes used them if he wanted the side door opened. After convicting Gilmer, the Magistrate, Mr. E. Page,. passed severe comment on the way in which the hotel had been conducted, and said that the evidence of the witnesses had been quite unsatisfactory and unconvincing.

"I think it is perfectly clear that this man is unsuitable to carry on a licence when lie has sot himself to flout the law," said Mr. Page.

After Sub-Inspector Lopdell liad referred to' two previous convictions against the defendant, in July and August, Mr. Page inflicted a fine of £10 and ordered the licence to be endorsed. Although . there was power to cancel a licence where there had been two convictions in six months, Mr. Page said that in order, to avoid inconvenience he would adjourn the question of cancellation for four weeks. "A STAOOEBINO PRICE."

After the first charge had been disposed of Gilmer. pleaded guilty to an offence of selling liquor after hours on 29th August. On this occasion a sergeant and a constable visited the hotel at 9.33 p.m., and found the licensee behind the bar .with. elevea men drinking in front. A fine of £10 was also inflicted for this offence, and the Magistrate adjourned the question of cancellation. ■ • • . j--' Cdunsel for the defendant, Mr. vy. Perry, .said that the only excuse he had to put* before the Court was that Gilmer had paid "a really staggering price for the hotel," which was not commensurate with the trade. As time went on he found such a huge drop in the hotel takings that .he could not meet the mortgages. , "The circumstances leading up to the disclosure of the warning system arose during the hearing of the first charge to which Gilmer pleaded not guilty. ' In this instance a man was seen to come out of the front door of the hotel, look up and down the street, and let out a man named M'Arthur, who had in his possession a large bottle of beer, the outside of which was wet.

BUTTONS STILL THERE,

In the witness-box Gilmer denied knowing anything about the sale of the bee?. lie was then cross-examined in connection with the conduct of the hotel.

Mr. Lopdell: "Why have you got bells under the window-sill on the street?" '

Witness: "There are none." "They were there last night then." —"They are not in working order." "When did you-put them there?" — "Some time ago." The Magistrate: "What does that mean?"—" Well, quite frankly, the moaning of it was that it was a warning to me that .'the', police were coming." Mr. Lopdeli: "Does not Stewart regulaxjy stand outside that window every evening: when-business is being done?"—'-' Not now.'? .

Counsel objected to the nature of the cross-examination, but Mr. Page said that evidence as to a system of signalling was a matter relevant to'the conduct of the hotel..

Mr. Lopdell: "Are thqso bells there now?"—" The buttons are still there, but the wires were disconnected about a week ago." • . .' ":' "Then yon, have been Tegularly carrying on after-hours trading?"— "Well, up to recently that is true." The barman Stewart was also crossexamined closely by 'Sub-Inspector Lopdell regarding the working of the bells. .-'■'.' .. ,'\ >

Mr. Lopdell: "Did you have any duties outside the hotel 1"—"No, only to wash down the place. .That's, all,"

"Did any of the servants have a job outside in the street?"—" Not to my knowledge." "Do you ever stand outside in front of the window near the front door?" — "Yes, sometimes." "Is there anything about the sill that is peculiar?" —"No." .

"EXPLAIN WHAT YOU MEAN."

"Do you know of any buttons that were under that sill?"—" Yes, but they are not working now." "Where do they ring!"—" One rang in the passage and the other in the bar." •

"Whose job was it to use.tho buttons outside?"—" They were never used, ,they were obsolete."

Questioned again as to the use. of the bells, witness said that occasionally ho had used them if ho wanted the side door opened. - ■

Tho Magistrate: "Just explain what you mean." —"If there were any of the servants going in at night and there, was no one in the street, they would use the front door, otherwise I would ring'for the'side door to be opened."

The Magistrate: "You seriously tell me that?"—" Yes."

Mr. Lopdoll: "Why the secrecy of placing those bells under tho sill?"— No answer.

"You did" not expect to be asked about that, of course, did you?"— Again no answer.

"NOT INTERESTED."

Another of Gilmer's employees, Matthew Robert Eeid, said that he invariably walked outside and stood near the window. -

Mr. Lopdoll: "Do you ever put your hand under the sill?"—" No."

"Do you know that there are some bells there?"—"Yos, I think there are Bomo bells there, but I don't know what they aro used for."

Mr. Page: "You seriously say that you do not know what they were used for?"—"I know nothing about them. I was not interested."

In entering his conviction, Mr. Page said that the evidence was circumstantial, but the manner in which tho man had been lot out of the'hotel and the fact that the bottle was wet made the evidence satisfactory.

Mr. Page also convicted Stewart on a charge of unlawfully supplying liquor, and fined him £1.