HAMILTON AFFAIR.

Gisborne Times, Volume XIX, Issue 1595, 27 October 1905, Page 3

HAMILTON AFFAIR.

PORRIDGE AND LICENSING LAWS. (Observer.) A few weeks ago a young man named Goldsmith, who, like his name-

sake of immortal memory, is a traveller, met with a very unplosant experience at Hamilton. Goldsmith being a tourist with some money, is very naturally a person of fastidious tastes, and when he discovered one Snnday morning that the people of the hotel where he was stopping did not supply porridge on the Sabbath, he put on his cap and walked down to the next pub, to see if ho could obtain some boiled oats there. He walked

into tho strange hoetolry at the end next the dining room and the farthest from the bar, but before he could inquire of the landlord or the cook whether the porridgo was off, or whether it had over been on, he was grabbed by a policeman, and asked to state bis name, with a view to prosecution, on a charge of being on licensed premises during prohibited hours.

If Goldsmith had been after beer, he might have adopted an apologetic attitude, but, being imperiously in need of porridge, he resented the action of the constable, and refused to

Lo anything he was asked, except to eave the hotel. Why the policeman hould have interfered at all is not ivident; it was clearly a case in which he exercise of discretion and common lense on his part could not have wrought condemnation upon him even !rom the most frantic prohibitionist. Even though the constable had made up his mind to take no risks in respect of the Act, it was still open to him to proceed against Goldsmith by summons. The offender’s name could easily have been obtained. Instead of this, the constable produced the handcuffs, and then followed just what anybody might have expected a rough and tumble oia the sidewalk, in which the police force very properly came off second best. . . . The honorary bench took as much of the responsibility as they could lay claim to, and fined Goldsmith £l, with 18s costs, for resisting the police, and ordered him to pay £1 for the torn jacket, remitting the crime of being on licensed premises in pursuit of porridge to the attention of Mr Northcroft, S.M- Goldsmith paid the fine and costs, astounded probably to find that they didn’t tot up to another hundred pounds, and was let off by

depositing £5 bail. A few days ago the charge of being on licensed premises during prohibited hours came on for hearing before the S.M-, and after Mr ISoithcroft had finished with it, the Jay Pees who were concerned in the first chapter of the comedy must have felt sorry that they did not leave the whole business for magisterial treatment. Goldsmith did not appear on this occasion, having gone to the South. Island, but Mr Northcroft did not expect him to be -present. The S.M. was quite satisfied to have the police before him, and the sound and wholesome advice he bad to offer in connection with the case was for their benefit alone. He de-

dined to punish Goldsmith any more, jje thought a certain amount of discretion should be used in cases of this sor t. The man only wanted porridge, and because he went into the hotel on Sunday morning to get it he got himself into trouble. There were three convictions against him already, and he thought the police might have witndrawn this charge. The police pleaded that they das--ent, and the S.M. went on to say that four charges against the man for going into a hotel to get porridge on Sunday morning was altogether too much, He likened the affair to a repeating rifle, in which you put as many charges as you can into the magazine. He ordered the amount of bail (£5) to be returned to <i censed.