MAGISTRATE’S COURT

Hokitika Guardian, 17 December 1932, Page 8

MAGISTRATE’S COURT

BREACHES OF LICENSING LAWS. MR MELDRUM LEARS CHARGES. As the result of a visit by the police to the Red Lion Hotel on the evening of Saturday, December 3, and on December 6, .several charges weie preferred in the Magistrate’s Court at .uokjtiaa ye<teiway aiicrnoon before Air W. Mel drum, S. <M. charges were preferred in the Alagtstrate’s Court at Hokitika th.-s auernooii before Mr W. Meldrum, S.M, George McQabe , was ■: changed that being other than the licensee, he did oupply liquor after hours, on the evening of December 3. John James Mclntosh was charged with opening his promises for the ?.aie of liquor and with selling liquor alter hpurs, and. .with exposing liquor for sale, on December 3, and with selling liquor after hours, and with exposing liquor for sale on December 6. Aic(jabe and John J. Mclntosh junr., were charged with supplying liquor, being pei sons other than the licensee ■ two oefeDdants were charged wuh ibeing found on the premises of the Red Lion Hotel after hours on December 6. Three defendants were each charged with aiding and abetting McCabe in t.ie gale of liquor on December 3. All were represented by Sir J. A. Murdoch.

Sergeant C. J. King .said that on December 3, a party of tennis players from Grey visited Hokitika. They had tea at the hotel and then went along to the bar where they had liquor and it was while they were having this that, they were found by the police. The licensee was not present, but the Lquor had been served by the barman. Constable A. Randall gave evidence of finding four ladies end three men in the parlour. McCabe was seen ' to receive a tray from someone in the bar, by means of the slide. Those in the parlour said they considered they were entitled t 0 refreshments as they had had tea at the hotel. The ladies had consumed ginger beer and the men shandies, McCabe admitting having supplied them. ■Mr Murdoch: If the drink had been consumed in the 'dining room, you would have said nothing would you? That the premlssable hour, 8 o’clock as required by the Act, had transpired. Counsel said that the party had been late in leaving the courts and then went to the hotel for tea. The ■hotel staff had put .themselves out to extend -hospitality to the visitors. The charges of open.ng for the sale of liquer, and of selling liquor, a$ preferred against the licensee, could not be preferred in this case. After tea, desiring refreshment, the ladies had had soft drinks, and the men shandies on tlia way out. There was nothing in the evidence to indicate that a sal®, in the meaning of the word, had beenmade.

The Magistrate: .Surely if they had the liquor at the table, there is just ■as much gale concerned as by having at the bar parlor. John James Mclntosh, s enr., said it wa s 7-20 p.m. when the party entered the .hotel, and one of the party .was a friend of defendant. In his opinion there was nothing .in .the- nature of a sab in the supplying .of 'liquor -which had been done at the invitation of defendant’s daughter. Coun el said the circumstances surrounding the! case were negative of the licensee making a sale and opening for sale. Sergeant King : Ther e wa s certainly a supply of liquor, although the evidence does not disclose that monej was passed. There wa s a very strong presumption. The party supplied were travellers, nothoarders. t Therefore the bar must have been opened for the supply of liquor. The Magistrate: It appears the liquor was supplied, and that the party were not legally entitled to be served. The licensee was completely in the dark in the matter, but he was responsible for the act s of hie barmen. McCabe was fined £l, and the charges relating to December 3 against the licnsoo. were dismissed. The defendants charged with aiding and abetting were ordered to pay costs.

Regarding the joint charge against McCabe and Mclntosh, junr., counsel contended the evidence bad, a s two men could not .be charged with selling one glass of beer.

The Magistrate: Could not on e open the bottle, and the other serve it? Counsel : I don’t think they could wait that long for it in Hokitika. Sergeant King said that on December 6,° he visited the hotel, and in the bar parlour he found the license’s son, the. barman, and two men, neither of. whom were ' boarders. McCabe had served the men, but Mclntosh junr., had said that it was “his shout.” That was w'hy a joint charge had been laid. One of t.h e non-bonrde r s said he came to see Mclntosh junr., the other offering no excuse. Mclntosh said that, a* the licensee’s son, he had a right to servo them.

Counsel: Do you. doubt that the licensee’s son invited one of t,ie llv3n in? I don’t know. Counsel : Do you remember it being said that the o'ther .man came to se e a lodger?—'No, I do not. Counsel sa.id that Mclntosh iunr. had altered his status in the hotel to that of lodeer which entitled him to nil the privileges, and was such on the date of the /information. Mclntosh junr., and one of the men had gone to the former’s room after a W 1"" moating to get a book, while the other had also come to n hona fids gue t; ‘ John James Mclntosh, junr., .said that, he was a lodger in the hotel, nf Tvh'nh his father v v»« licensee. On the night in question he had gene with a

friend to his room for a book regardlodge matters, al'terwardy entertaining huu as..Jus .guest.. The.. . other, .visitor had arrived to see a guest, who wars out, and he invited him to j o; n tbsm. pending the gue-st',3 return. Horace Parry said lie had gone to the hotel to see a Mr Bain with whom h e had business relations. He detailed the visit of the police, and said that they had ‘had a drink at the invitation of Mcintosh, junr, ,Sergeant King; You are'a frequent visitor at the hotel?—Yes, Mr Mclntosh is my right hand director -in the company and my mail often produces matter requiring Air Mclntosh’s advice and attention.

.-e"" "int King: Do you always have a definite reason for going there ?—I **d i to tu.it, -.'jergeaiH. t The case was adjourned till January 13. ON LICENSED PREMISES. Two men were charged with being found on the premises of the Post > no oil after hours and were ordered to pay costs. CIVIL OASES. Judgment for plaintiff by default wcis given in the fu.lowing cases:— Westland Hospital Board v. Mer-vyn Berkett £lB 10s, and costs £2 ,14s; John J. Morgan v. Burn Walsh £ll 16s 6d, and costs £2 14s. CLAIM FOR POSSESSION. Albert Cede-rman (Air Elcock) v. Frederick Charles Marshall, (Mr Murdoch) claim for possession of iron pipes, or £42 16s. Plaintiff withdrew from the case upon the settlement of a legal point on which the claim had been oM, and costs were allowed to defendant. NO DRIVER’S LICENSE. J. Matthews was charged with failure to produce his driver’s license, and was fined 10s .and casts. BREACH OF MAINTENANCE ORDER, A charge of disobedience of his maintenance order in respect of his -.wife was preferred against Richard Mao© D'urham. dhe case was adjourned until February 24.

DEFENDED CLAIM.

Arthur Appleton '(Air Murdoch) v. James Mark, claiming £29 15s, the claim being for possession and rent. Plaintiff said that defendant, who was in employment, had paid no rent sine© March 1931. Plaintiff had agreed to .forego the rent if defendant would vacate, and 'this had been agreed on, but defenadnt had not gone out. Defendant said tliat tlier© was not a house to bo :had .in Hokitika. He admitted the amount owing, and said that he, had only been in intermittent work since June of last year. Defendant was -allowed one month in which to pay. , .. gfe-Ks-fw - ■