DRUNK WHILE IN CHARGE OF CAR.

Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3940, 9 May 1929, Page 3

DRUNK WHILE IN CHARGE OF CAR.

SALESMAN FINED £2O. At the local Polite Coukt yesterday morning, before Messrs A. Fraser and M. E. Perrean, J,s P., Norman Sinclair Waterston, a young man employed as a car salesman for a Levin firm of motor dealers, was charged that on May 7th, at Mntuiti, he was found in a state of intoxication while in charge of a motor car. Mr. M. B. Bergin appeared for accused and entered a plea of guilty.-. Constable Owen, in evidence, stated that defendant, ft ho was a car salesman employed by a Levin form of car dealers, came to Fox ton yesterday morning in the course of his business and evidently visited one or tiwo hotels and took too much liquor for at about noon, in consequence of a complaint, witness and Constable Bell went out to Motuiti and there found a new car stuck in the sand on the left hand side of the road. Worn all appearances the car had been backed into its position and on looking inside witness discovered defendant in the front seat, his right hand clasping the steering wheel and lying on his side asleep. From an examination made witness was convinced that defendant was drunk and with the assistance of Constable Bell he was lifted out of the car and carried about a chain to another car and it was not until they were struggling to get him in the other car that he woke up. He was in a hopeless state of drunkenness. This was defendant’s first appearance before the court and nothing was known about him. After his removal flrom his car he was placed in the lock-nip where he remained from 1 o’clock until 7.30 p.m. when he was released on bail in one surety of £SO. One might expect a little better behaviour from a car salesman and a man who is always on the road, concluded Constable Gwen.

Mr. Bergin asked that the Bench take a! lenient view of the case. Accused’s position was due to an unfortunate set of cireulmstances. He set out for Foxton early yesterday morning' without breakfast and after being up until a late hour the night previously. On arriving in Foxton he visited Whyte’s Hotel to enter into negotiations over a car deal. There he later met a man, an ex-publican from Opunake who also had a car. He stayed in the hotel until about 11 a.m. unwisely partaking of the hospitality tendered blip and trying to make a deal. Papers found in his possession when arrested would bear out the fact that he had been in communication with Mr. Kirkland over the ear. Shortly after 11 a.m. he left to go to Aipiti but prior to leaving invited a passenger to take a run around Foxton with him, and this fact would be sufficient to show that accused was sober up to this point. After the run 'defendant Imet a man and motored him to the Manawatu Hotel where lie had one drink. After remaining there talking for some time he left the hotel and drove away. While driving on the Himatangi road in the car, which was a closed in sedan anodel, the sun and the drumming of the car had a very adverse qffect on him and at Motuiti, realising that he was losing control of his senses, he backed the ear oil the road and went to sleep. It was admitted that defendant was intoxicated hut there were mitigating circumstances in the fact that he got off the road rather than continue on in the condition in which he found himself. He was not a hardened drinker but a young mau on the threshold of life whose zeal had overrun his discretion. He had been driving a car for the past fourteen years and had never been, previously in. trouble. He keenly felt his position and the ignominity of having been confined in a police cell. He yet had his family and employer to meet and the result of that would be obvious. He had been severely punished and yet had to receive further punishment for his escapade. In the circumstances counsel asked that the Bench deal leniently with the case as there was not much likelihood of defendant again offending in this direction. If his license was cancelled his means of' livelihood would be taken away frolm him. ICounsel thought a small line would .meet the case in this instance. The Bench, while pointing out that the Act provided a penalty of £IOO or three months’ imprisonment for the offence with which defendant was charged, said that they would take a lenient view of the case, notwithstanding the fact that as a motor-car salesman, defendant had no right to touch liquor. This was, in the opinion of the Bench, the worst feature of the case. A line of £2O was imposed and one month fallowed in which to pay the fine, default being fixed at one month’s imprisonment.