THE LICENSING ACT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIII, Issue 1064, 2 November 1911, Page 3

THE LICENSING ACT.

TWO ALLEGED BREACHES

BOTH CASES DISMISSED

At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday, Henry S. Munro, licensee of Family Hotel, was charged on the information of the police with on October Bth supplying Robert A. Burnett, a prohibited person, and also with Sunday trading on the date in question. SubInspector Norwood conducted the case on behalf of the police, and Mr Cooper appeared tor the defendant, who pleaded not guilty to both charges. For the prosecution the police called John Spelman, blacksmith and wheelwright, of Pohangiua, who stated that on Saturday, Oct. 7th, he slept at Burnett's boardinghouse, and during Sunday went with Burnett to Mr Rogers’ house in Whyte Street. There tney got pen and ink to write a cheque. Burnett filled the cheque in for£ji and witness signed it.

The cheque was produced and counsel for the defence admitted cheque was paid into Bank ot New Zealand by deleudant at about 11 a.m. ou Monday, October 9th. Witness, continuing, said the cheque was dated the ninth because the eighth was a Sunday. Had a conversation with Burnett and as a result of this Burnett and witness walked down town to Munro’s Hotel. Muuro was standing ou the sidewalk. Burnett spoke to him aud witness heard Muuro say “all right.” Witness saw Burnett give Muuro the cheque on the sidewalk. Muuro aud Buruett then went into the hotel and witness saw Muuro give a bottle ot whisky to Buruett. Witness was in the hotel at the time. Had gone iu to ask for accommodation as a traveller. Went into hotel about live minutes after Muuro aud Burnett. Went in by trout door. Alter Muuro had given Burnett the buttle ot whisky he also gave him wuat witness supposed was change out of the cheque. The bottle given Burnett was a dark one, it was a similar do!tie to the one produced, w.mui not say il it was Crawford's whisky. Afterwards saw a bottle in possession of Constable Woods ou which witness put his initials. That was about Tuesday. Did uot come to any arrangement about staying at Munro’s hotel. When they came out of the hotel Buruett and witness went to Rogers’ aud drank some whisky. Mrs Rogers was present but she did uot have auy whisky. They only had oue drink each. Then went to Buruett's aud Burnett asked us upstairs. Weut into a room and a mau named John Connell went into the room with us. We had some more whisky. Was iu the room for about 20 miuutes. Thought they emptied the bottle. Wheu witness came down saw Mrs Buruett iu the kitchen. Don’t think she came upstairs. The bottle was left iu the room. Buruett put it under the pillow. Did uot kuow that Buruett was prohibited. To Mr Cooper; Came dowu to Foxton pretty frequently. Didn’t reckon was drunk during the last time he was iu Foxtou. Was iu Muuro’s hotel ou Saturday uight. Didn’t think he asked Mrs Munro for a bed. Did not threaten Mrs Muuro in auy way. Couldn’t say whether it was top cheque that witness signed at Rogers’ house. Didn’t thiuk he was present wheu cheque was filled iu in Rogers’ house. Only wrote one cheque out ou Sunday, also wrote out oue for £,'l at Munro’s hotel on the Monday. Cashed a cheque lor ,£1 iu Muuro’s hotel oil Morulav morning. Coul 1 not say who filled this cueque in. Weut to Muuro’s hotel in the forenoon of the Mouday. Muuro ret used to cash a cheque because of the way it was written out aud witness lore it up, aud Muuro wrote out another cheque which witness signed. Couldn’t say wheu the cheque that witness lure up was written out. Had uo dnuk iu Muuro’s on the Sunday. Did uot try to get any. Munro aud Burnett were standing iu front ot the bar when Muuro gave Buruett the whisky. Muuro was iu the bar. Witness didn’t want a drink theu aud didu’t ask lor oue. Witness told Constable Woods that Buruett had got a bottle ot whisky from Muuro ou Sunday. Told the police on the Monday morning. That was the truth. It would be about 12 o'clock wheu witness saw Constable Woods. Thought it was after witness had beeu to Muuro’s hotel that day. Didn’t see anyone else iu Muuro’s hotel ou the Monday morning. To the Police : Thiuk it was after dinner. Was in Mumo's on Mouday aud cashed the cheque. The two cheques produced tor £,l each, dated October yth, were signed by witness. The two cheques produced were uot paid iuto the Bank by Mr Muuro, but by others. Ou witness being shown the tour cheques he could not swear which cheque was written out iu Rogers’ house, but it was likely to be one of them. Witness said he filled iu two of the cheques produced himself. To the Beuch ; When Buruelt got the whisky from Munro he put it in his left trouser pocket aud buttoned up his coat. He put the change in his right hand pocketAt this time witness asked Muuro for accommodation as a traveller. He was going away at the time and just said “Oh” aud made uo more answer.

William F. Gray, licensee ol the Post Office Hotel, Boston, stated that on Sunday, Oct. 6lh, saw Burnett. He was alone. He passed through witness house and went across the road and ou towards Muuro. No one joined him. Saw him standing on the steps at

Munro’s hotel when witness went over to the post office. When witness came out ot the post office Burnett had disappeared. Did not see Muuro at all. There was no one else on that side of the street. It was nine o’clock. Did not see Burnett again that day. Was asleep at 2 o’clock in the afternoon.

I'.nv i s Rogers, labourer, Foxton, said that he knew Burnett. At about 2 o'clock Burnett came to his house. He asked for a pen and ink and witness got it. He then brought Mr Spehuau in and they went into the trout room and witness went back to his dinner. Did not see Spelman give Burnett anything. Did not see anyone write anything. They went out again. About an hour afterwatds Burnett came to the back door alone. He came in and paid witness’ wife half a crown he owed. Did not see Spelman. Burnett alter paying the half crown went out again. He did not stay two minutes. Did not see Buruelt again that day. Did not see Spelman again, but saw him in Main Street on Monday. On Tuesday he came to my house and witness ordered him oil the premises. To Mr Cooper : Witness said he never speaks to Spelman. Had a drink with him oue night at Whyte’s hotel. Never bad any whisky with Burnett and Spelman in witness’ house on Sunday. Sarah Burnett, wife of R. H. Burnett, said she knew Spelman who stayed at their house on Saturday and Sunday, October yth and Bth. Witness’ husband was home on the Sunday. Saw husband aud Spelman go away together at about half past oue. Did not see them return, but about half past two witness went up the tire escape aud along the passage, and met her husband coming out of No. 3 bedroom with a bottle in his hand. Two other meu Spelman aud Connell were in that room. Witness spoke to her husband aud then went downstairs. Found an empty glass in the bedroom. It had had whisky in it- Witness took the bottle Irom her husband when she met him in the passage. There was a little whisky in it which witness drained out the back door. On Mouday morning witness hauded the bottle over to Constable Woods.

To Mr Cooper: A man named Patterson was uot staying at hei house on October Bth. He had left the week previous. Constable Woods gave evidence to the effect that the bottle produced was the oue received from Mrr Burnett on Monday, October 9th, at about 9 a.m. Coustable Sweeuey stated that this matter was reported to him ou Mouday morning and just before uoon he weut to interview Buruett. He was iu bed, partly under the influence of liquor. Afterwards interviewed Spelman. Knew Spelman. Afterwatds went aud saw Coustable Woods. This concluded the evidence for the prosecution. Mr Cooper briefly addressed the Bench. He did uot consider that ou the evidence submitted there was a case to answer. He referred to the very unsatisfactory evidence of the chief witness lor the prosecution and outlined the evidence he intended calling it the Magistrate thought it was necessary.

The Magistrate said the case was not oue for a conviction and must be dismissed. There was uo corroboration of Spelmau’s evidence aud his evidence was such that he could uot couvict ou it. The cases would be dismissed.