Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

PROPRIETOR FINED

SALE OF LIQUOR

ECHO TO KOKATAHI CASE.

Arising out of a case heard in the .Magistrate’s Court a few weeks ago, six men were charged with'being found in the Kokatahi 1 hotel on Alareli 29th. after hours. j The proprietor, Edward Tapner Sherriff, was charged on three coiints, of opening the hotel for the sale of liquor -after hours, with exposing liquor for sale -after hours, and with selling liquor- after hours. . 1 The charges were heard before ? Air AV. Aleldrum, S-AI. Four of the six defendants appeared and pleaded guilty. Sergeant King said these men had been before the Court on a charge of disorderly conduct and had admitted the evidence. Each was a- -first offender, and was convicted and ordered to pay costs.

The case against the proprietor was then proceeded with, defendant 1 being represented by Air A. It. Elcock. He was instructed to plead guilty to selling. The proprietor admitted having served liquor to the six defendants who were only on the premises for .a few minutes. Defendant had been before the Court before. The Magistrate fined defendant -£5 and costs £1 12s. Pleas of not guilty were entered against the other two charges, which were withdrawn. . He was further charged with selling liquor to persons under 21 years of -age. Air E’cock said that defendant had admitted the sale Put held that there was no indication that any of the visitors to the hotel that evening f ere under age. . ' v Arthur Lambeth** aged 19, said that he had been supplied on the night in question by defendant. Defendant, in th e box, admitted serving Lambeth. He' remembered him coming in; with five others, and had absolutely no .suspicion that witness was under 21, otherwise he would not have served him. V Airs Sherriff, wife of the proprietor, said that she, also, had no idea that they were under 21. The Magistrate - said that the witness, Lambeth, did not obviously look under 21. He accepted defendant s statement that -lie thought them oyer 21, and dismissed the case. .

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/HOG19320527.2.42

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Hokitika Guardian, 27 May 1932, Page 5

Word count
Tapeke kupu
345

PROPRIETOR FINED Hokitika Guardian, 27 May 1932, Page 5

PROPRIETOR FINED Hokitika Guardian, 27 May 1932, Page 5

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert