LICENSING ACT

Hokitika Guardian, 3 September 1929, Page 3

LICENSING ACT

GREYMOUTH, ' Sept. 2. At the Magistrate’s Court yester- ; . day, before Mr W.‘ Meldrum, S.M., ) Edward Quinn, licensee of Suburban Hotel, was charged with selling liquor ; after hours, and keeping, his premises open after hours for the purpose of selling liquor. James Quinn, son of the licensee, and barman at the hotel,, was charged with obstructing the police in the execution of their duty, and also with assaulting Sergeant J. N Smyth.

,' After hearing evidence and following . addresses by Air Hannan and--tlie Senior-Sergeant bn the evidence before the Court, His Worship stated' the licensee was charged with , two' iriformaitions, firstly Vimh selling liquor after hours, and secondly with opening has premises after hours for the uiilawful sale of liquor. There was ho evidence of a direct sale, although it •was admitted that drinks had been 'supplied to three : boarders. Evidence - had not been brought to. contradjict that. If such were the facts, _ no. offence had been committed by the licensee, and the charge of selling wouldbe dismissed. On the charge of “opening,” the side door was not locked and seven men had entered .the hotel by the side door immediately before the police. They went in for the purpose of getting liquor, but on, staking James Quinn for a drink/; hevrb- - fused to supply any, saying that, they had “no hppe on a Saturday night, as it. was too risky,” .which may suggest that on any other night tiCy could have obtained it. The evidence of the other three witnesses supported that. There was no proof that they got a drink. It was no offence .Mo leave the side door unlocked. Tpid evidence was so direct that liquor had been refused, that both charges 'agaiiisli the licensee would be dismissed. Ih regard t<i the charges against Janie* Quinn, these were quite different,' arid lie was Satisfied that the barman had not spoken the truth when.he .said . lie'did not know they- were the ;poH’o6i N6* attempt' had been made to exclude r thb seveiv men,'.'but'.wheir; the 1 police canr.e he immediately started to;fight \ to keep them out. In : doing that'he had obstructed them in their endeavours to-carry out their duty, and would he £2 and Ids costs. - Oft the charge of assault, it was questionable whether defendant did any fnote than try to prevent the police entering.l He did not think Quinn had deliberately struck the Sergeant. Bfe did riot think, under -the circumstandds that Quinn was guilty of assaulty-atM the charge would be dismissed. .