BREACH OF PROHIBITION ORDER.

Manawatu Herald, Volume L, Issue 3996, 12 September 1929, Page 2

BREACH OF PROHIBITION ORDER.

“ASSISTING TO PROCURE” 'CHARGE.

At the local Magistrate’s Court this morning before Mr. J. L. Stout, S.M., Peter Petersen was charged with procuring intoxicating liquor dufring the currency of a prohibition order.

Arising out of the above chan’gc D. G. Robinson, A. Fee and A. T. Harper were charged with assisting Peterson to procure intoxicating liquor. All parties pleaded not guilty.

In evidence Constable Owen stated that at about fi.2o p.m. on the 31st August, Constable Bell and witness were walking along Hall Street, when they heard men’s voices. There was no one about the road and on investigating they found four men sitting on the ground behind a hedge. They were all more, or less intoxicated. On the ground between Fee and Peterson was a full bottle of beer unopened (produced) and close beside them were two newly emptied beer bottles and a half empty bottle. The defendants all knew each other quite well. Peterson was a well-known identity and prohibited in May last . The fact that Peterson was a prohibited man was published in the papers and was known to all accused. * Robinson asked 'Constable Owen if lie saw them supplying Peterson with liquor. They lmd not given him any drink. Peterson said he had heard voices and went over to where the men were.. He was uninvited and did not get a drink. He Avas not intoxicated on the arrival of the police, and was able to climb over a barbed wire fence without scratching himself when told to by the police.

Constable (Owen said that Peterson had been on the drink for about a week and showed signs of intoxication on their arrival.

Constable Bell gave eoryoborative evidence. Peterson, he said, smelt of liquor and Harper and Robinson were very much intoxicated. There Avas no necessity for the men to get behind the hedge to have a drink as the Street Avas quite dark.

D. Robinson, in evidence, said he attended a football match in Levin Avith Fee during the afternoon. They decided to have a drink before 6 o’clock and on making their Avay to the hotel they met Harper. Witness decided as it Avas getting late to procure a couple of bottles of beer and have the drink on the setion. They Avent behind the hedge and Avere just having a drink when Peterson arrived.

The S.M. (facetiously) : How did he know you Avere there? Did he smell the liquor? (Laughter).

No, he heard our voices. Continuing, Robinson said that they had scalrcely had time t-o hav r e a drink Avhen Constable OAven turned a torch on them. j The S.M.: Most unfortunate!

Constable OAven stated that neither lie nor Constable Bell had a torch but this Robinson denied.

A. Fee entered the box to give corroborative eA 7 idence in regard to the torch. Constable Chveii had a light of some description.; Witness never saiv.Peterson have a drink. The ( S.M.: Was it too dark ? Didn’t you see Avliether he had a bottle.or not? (laug’hter). Witness could not explain hoAV Peterson got there. They were there about- 20 minutes and Peterson arrived about ten minutes after their arrival. The S.M.: Hoav many bottles of beer (were opened?—Only one.

The S.M.: You must have been uiilueiky then. There were two others opened. Peterson also entered the box and in evidence said that he was on his way home and heard them talking.

The S.M.: Did you hear the chink of the bottles?

Witness: No, and I did not see any beelr. The others must have been careful to hide the liquor as they knew he was prohibited. As a matter of fact he would'nt have had a drink if it had been offered.

The S.M. (in a surprised voice) : What, not on a dark night behind a hedge? The S.M. said the Court could not believe Peterson did not have a drink when lie was found behind a hedge on a dark night witli beer all around him. Each accused was convicted and lined £2 with costs 10/-.