ILLEGALLY ON LICENSED PREMISES.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXIX, Issue 1717, 26 May 1917, Page 3

ILLEGALLY ON LICENSED PREMISES.

SEVEN CONVICTIONS. At the local Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr W. G. Kenrick, S.M., seven local residents were charged with being found on licensed premises—Post Office Hotel —on Sunday, April Ist, at about 11 a.in.

The first case taken was that against Thomas Smith, who did not appear, but who had admitted the offence, when served with the summons. The police stated that defendant was seen coming out of the hotel. A fine of 20s, with costs 7s, was inflicted.

Thomas Wanklyn, similarly charged, slated that he was not in the

building at all. He had occasion to go to the rear of the premises, and when coming out stopped at the kilidien door, speaking to one of the inmates, and whilst he was there the police arrived. Constable Woods said that defendant was not in the building, but was standing in llava rd talking to one of the inmates. The Magistrate said that defendant had a lawful excuse in going to the hack of (he premises, but created a breach by standing in the yard talking. Under the circumstances he would only indict a line of As, with costs 7s.

Thomas East pleaded not guilty. He admitted being on the premises, but not illegally. He was a friend of the licensee and his family, and usually had his meals there on Sundays by invitation. On the Sunday in question he had all three meals there, and was on the premises on tin 1 oeeasioii of the police’s first visit about 11 a.m., and also when a second visit was made at 7 p.m. Constable Woods said (here was no question Hint defendant did usually have his meals at the hotel on Sundays, On the day in queslion, however, be was in the bar parlour. The Magistrate said it was quite in order for anyone to be on licensed premises for tlie purpose of having their meals, and also to be there as a friend of the licensee. In the lat - ter case, however, a person should be upstairs or in a private room, but had no right to he in the vicinity of (he bar. Defendant was near the bar on the day in question, and had no right there,. A line of 20s, with 7s costs was indicted.

Herbert Brown, on being called, did not appear, and was fined 20s, with costs 7s.

James Tyson pleaded guilty, but staled that lie was not in Hie building, being only in Hie back yard. Constable Woods said that defendanl was seen running away from the rear of the premises. He didn't see him in (he building'. Fined 20s, cost* 7s.

11l the case against Frederick Walls, there was no appearance, and a similar penalty was indicted. Jame* Collins did not appear, hul .-fill a letter admitting the offence. Fined 20s, costs 7s.