TELEGRAMS.

Hokitika Guardian, 7 October 1920, Page 4

TELEGRAMS.

(Per Press Association.) A POLICE ENQUIRY. WELLINGTON, Oct. 8.. Justice Stringer and Police .Supt. Wright of Auckland are sitting to-dajv .to hear allegations made against tho police administration of Wellington, by ex-Deteetive Sergt. Michael Mason, who alleges he was compelled to resign on account of the attitude taken up by three police officers. Mason had charge of a case in which two men were jphnrgi ed with stealing sanitary pans from Pet-one Borough Council. He alleged that evidence favourable to the accused was not brought forward and that he was called to account, because, in the witness box, lie brought matters which in his opinion should he brought out in •fairness to the accused; that he was subjected to humiliation l>y his superior officers and bad no course open but to resign. , WELLINGTON, October 8. At the police enquiry this afternoon Mason in evidence stated that shortly after the Supreme Courts disposal of case against Miles and Miinrra, he handed in his resignation. Up to the present time he had not received his discharge. Witness was lengthily cross-examined by Mr Skerrett, who, referring to witnesses’ conversation, with Inspector McTlveimy in the Street, asked:—“Did you >ay to the Inspector: “For God’s sake, don’t prosecute them? If you do, my evidence will get them off.’' ” Witness replied that that conversation related f-o the prosecution of a third party, and not to Millarra and Miles. “Did you not say to the Inspector: It means th 0 end of me in the service?” “I did not use those words. I merely said that I would tell the truth, even if it were the last case I ever prosecuted.” The inquiry was adjourned till tomorrow. MR W. A. WATT RETURNING. AUCKLAND, Oct. 6. Mr W. A. Watt, the Federal Treasurer, is a through' passenger by the Niagara. He declined an interview, saying he adhered to his determination not to open his mouth until he returned to. Australia. , MINISTERS FOR NEW ZEALAND AUCKLAND, Oct. 6. Rev. Dr Gibb, a passenger by the Niagara, leaves for Wellington to-night. He went to England to get twenty home missioners and twenty ministers for the Presbyterian Church. He says he secured his men in face of great difficulties as the Church in the Old Country has the same shortage of recruits as New Zealand. Nearly all he secured are young and of a good brand. Touching Church Union, he said he was not at all hopeful of anything coming out of the suggestions at the Lambeth Conference, hut the union of churches, usually designated as evangelical, in his opinion was very hopeful. He was practically certain that the Established Church of Scotland and' the Free Church, would unite, the only question being the. relation of the Free Church to the State. MASTER PLUMBERS SUED. AUCKLAND, Oct. 5 Mr Poynton, SAL, to-day gave his reserved judgment in a claim for £lO 10s damages against three master plumbers in favour of a journeymen who left employment where he was earning 2s Id per hour, and got another job at 2s 3d per hour. As a result of a meeting of the Master Plumbers’ Association, a deputation interviewed the plaintiff’s new employer, with the result that plaintiff was not allowed to start work. Had a deputation of trade unionists induced a workei to break an engagement, and the worker did so, the union would be liable under common law, and the defendants in this ease were .---liable. Judgment was given for the amount claimed. LICENSING LAW. CHRISTCHURCH, Oct, 6. A little-known point in the Licensing Law was raised with success at Lyttelton to-day, when the licensee of the Empire Hotel was charged with having sold liquor during prohibited hours, and also with having exposed liquor for save during such hours. The police evidence was to the effect that three men were found in the commercial room of an hotel before 9 a.m., with liquor in front of them. Two were hoarders, and one was not. Counsel for the defendant said that a judgment given on appeal by the late Justice Richmond in a similar case in 1895 still stood as the correct interpretation of the law on the point. The Judgment said that “A sale of liquor by a licensed innkeeper on a Sunday to a lodger for consumption by himself and others whom he has met in the vicinity of the bar, and invited to have a drink with him, the lodger calling for the drinks and paying for them, is a sale to the lodger within % meaning of Section 156 of the Licensing Act, 1881, and is lawful under that Act. The mere exposure of liquor in a bar, so ns to be visible to others, whilst drink lawfully being sold to a lodger is being handed out from the bar, does not constitute exposure for sale to such otheis, or ah exposure for sale, generally, within the meaning of Section 175 of the A The Magistrate, Mr S. E. McCarthy accepted the decision quoted. It used to be the law, he said, that a lodger could not he supplied for his own consumption. "It was now intended to cover a sale to a lodger for the entertainment of his guests. The fact that the War Regulations Act made shouting illegal did not affect the point in the Licensing Act. The information was dismissed.