BREACH OF THE LICENSING ACT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 2484, 23 September 1922, Page 2

BREACH OF THE LICENSING ACT.

BOARDERS AND GUESTS. AN IMPORTANT RULING. At the local S.M. Court yesterday, before Mr J. L. Stout, S.M., the case of Police v. R. Palmer, licensee of the Family Hotel, charged with alleged breaches of the Licensing Act in supplying and exhibiting liquor for sale during prohibited hours, and the charges against Matthew Connolly and John Ross for being illegally on licensed premises, adjourned from last sitting, in order to hear the evidence of Connolly, were concluded. Mr Bergin, who appeared for the licensee, outlined' the defence, and stated that on Saturday evening, August 13th, Connolly rode into Foxton, put his horse into a paddock adjoining the hotel, and took the saddle and bridle into the kitchen of the hotel, booked a bed, and had tea there. He passed the constables on the evening in question near the hotel. The licensee booked n room for Connolly, but did not see Connolly until the following (Sunday) morning, when Connolly asked the licensee for a blank cheque, which the licensee procured from his ollice, which was situate in the liar, the latter leading off from the tap-room. Ross and Butler coming into the hotel, Connolly asked for drinks for them. At that period Constable Owen came upon tin- scene. Connolly treated the other two men as his guests, hut Butler had slept on the premises. R. Palmer, licensee of the Family Hotel, said Connolly came into the hotel at about (>.30 p.in. on Saturday, August 13th, carrying a saddle and bridle, and he hooked a room for him. Saw Connolly the following morning outside the hotel, and he n.-ked tor :i blank cheque. Told him to come inside. Connolly asked for, and was served with, a drink. When in the act of putting down the bar slide. Const,able Owen came in. and asked to see. the accommodation hook. The Constable appeared to be satisfied. Connolly’s name was in the book. To the' S.M.: Ross and Butler had a drink, which was ordered by Connolly. Could not say for sure whether Connolly used bis on Saturday night. Matthew Connolly, fiaxcutter, said lie arrived at the hotel at aliout (i. 30 p.m, on Saturday, August 33th. Put his horse in'the paddock, and passed Jhe constable. Took the saddle and bridle into the hotel, as the stable was locked. Mrs Palmer and a girl were in the kitchen, arid Butler was having ten. Had a cup of tea iu the diningroom. and informed the licensee’s wife he was stopping at the hotel thtil night, and would be back hi ter. His room was No. 13. He did not use the room that night, lint went to the hotel .at about 6 a.m. on Sunday. Got in by the fire escape, as there was no one about tlie hotel. Ho subsequently saw Butler, and asked him to assist in taking.a eow out to the mill. Also met Ross, and had an order to give him for stores to take out to.the mill. In company with the other two he walked in the direction of the Family Hotel on the Sunday in question, and met the licensee, and asked him for a blank cheque. Was told by the licensee to come inside, and he told the others not to go away. Ross and Butler subsequently came into the hotel, and he .said to the licensee, ‘‘You might as well .give them a drink.” Went into the liar to get the cheque. While in the bar. Constable Owen came in and asked what he was doing there. Could see his name in the book while the constable was looking,at it.

John Ross, master mariner, said he was in the hotel on the date in question with Butler and Connolly. Connolly told him not to go away without getting the order. Witness and Butler followed Connolly into the hotel.

.Mr Rergin cited authorities m -support of .a guest > right, to treat a friend.

Tli,. S.M. hold that Ross was not invited, hut followed Connolly and tho licensee into the hotel. He -aid a man could not he turned into a guest if ho was illegally on the promises. He was not altogether satisfied with Connolly’s bona tides its a hoarder. The licensee asked Connolly inside, and the others subsequently followed after being told to wait. The evidence for the defence showed that Ross had no business on the premises. Even the licensee had not the right to treat a chance acquaintance as a guest. In his opinion there had been an evasion of the Act. Connolly would he given the benefit of the doubt as to his being a boarder, and the charge against him would he dismissed. Ross would be convicted and fined £1 and costs 7s. and the licensee would be convicted and fined in a similar amount. The other charges against the licensee would be dismissed.