MARTON S.M. COURT.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXII, Issue 8861, 11 July 1907, Page 2

MARTON S.M. COURT.

THURSDAY, JULY 11. - (Before Mr Stanford, S.M.

Samuel Jolin Gibbons, licensee Of the White Hart Hotel, was charged that he did commit a certain offence uuder'the provisions of the Licensing Act, XBSI, to wit —“That the said Samuel John Gibbons, being a holder of a publican’s license for premises known as the White Hart Hotel, Marion, did sell to one Norman May Atkinson a bottle of whisky at a time when the said premises were by law directedsto be closed, and that the said Samuel Gibbons in the belief that proceedings were about to be taken against him in respect of such offence by the police, and with the intent that the police might be thereby deterred from instituting such proceedings, willfully attempted on the 9th ot June to pervert the course of justice by counselling and inciting'the said Norman May Atkinson to make a certain false statement to the police to the effect following, that is to say—‘That the said Norman May' Atkinson bought the bottle of whisky before 10 o’clock, about 9 o’clock, and paid Bill Ward for it, and that the said Bill Ward handed it to the said Norman May Atkinson, but that the said N. M. Atkinson handed it back to the said Bill Ward to put it on one side until the said N. M. Atkinson came back for it, ’ being an.indictable offence.” Mr Hutton (Wanganui) appeared for the Crown, and Mr Cohen defended,. Mr Hutton said an information leading up to this matter, fully setting out the circumstances of this case, was before the last sitting of Marton Court, when the licensee was convicted for a breach of the Licensing Act for selling a bottle of whisky after hours. Defendant pleaded guilty to the charge. With regard tc the present charge, it would be shown that the morning following the offence the constable had an interview with accused and told. him lie found Atkinson in possession ot liquor on coming out of the premises after hours. To this a defence was raised that the bottle of whisky was bought before 10 o’clock. Evidence would bo given by Atkinson that about 11 o’clock the same morning Gibbons drove out in a motor car to interview Atkinson, and asked him to give evidence which Gibbous must have known to bo absolutely false. He subsequently wrote a letter, which would; be produced, and which would speak for itself. Norman May Atkinson, labourer, employed at Rangitawa, Halcombs, said ho was in Marton on Saturday night, June Bth, in the White Hart Hotel after 10 o’clock—it was about 10.45. He got in at the back door; he saw Mr Gibbons, who asked how he got in; the other doors were closed. He told Gibbons how he gained admission; he asked about the liquor, and said ho wanted some whisky; Gibbous replied, “I will give you a small drop.” Witness said ha would take a small bottle. Gibbous gave him a bottle and he paid for it. He went out through the dining room and down the back of the hotel through a right-of-way. Constable Fitzpatrick then accosted him and asked him his name. This was near the right-of-way. He drove away homo after this. He saw Gibbous about 11 o’clock next morning. This was at his brother’s place at Patikipapa. Gibbons asked what he had said to Constable Fitzpatrick. He replied that the police had caught him, and he was sorry the thing had happened. He really forgot what ho did say. Gibbous told him he had got him into serious thing. He discussed with witness what had happened, and to the effect that ho might get out of it. He wanted witness to say the wrong thing. He asked him to say he had bought the whisky from Ward before closing up time. He did not remember him saying anything else. Witness replied, “If he said that he ■would be telling lies. ’ Gibbous told him to say “he got Ward to put it on one side for him. ’ ’ He saw Mr Gibbous and asked him before closing up time. He said ho would like to take some out with him as ho was going out to his brother’s.” Witness was speaking to Little, and Gibbous was going to the hairdresser’s to get a ■ shave. Gibbous said “Drive over the road.” This is all that happened at that time. Ward was not there. Ho did not promise to say w T hat Gibbous had asked him to say. Mr Hutton: Was what he asked you to sa> true? No. Witness went on to Rangitawa on Sunday. On the 12th got a letter from Gibbons through the post. It was addressed to him, as gardener, care of Pryce, Halcombe. The envelope was stamped. He burnt the envelope, ■which had “White Hart’’ printed on it. The letter was then read as follows: —“Dear Atkinson, —Just a line to remind you once again to be careful what you say to the ‘copper’; that is, if lie asks you any questions. Be sure that you tell him you bought it before 10 o’clock, about 9 say, not sure of time, and also be sure to say that you paid Bill Ward for it, and he handed it to you, but you asked him to put it on one side till you came back for it. If you stick religiously to this I think I can get out of the soup, as I will got Fred Avis to say lie saw you buy the whisky and pay Bill Ward for it, before 10 o’clock. It is a serious matter to me, and I trust you to help mo all you can, and whatever expense you are put to I will settle for you. Now don’t forgot, old boy, as this b thing is worrying my tripe out. Believe me, Yours truly, Sam. Gibbons. —P.S.—Bill Little will say that you told him you had bought a bottle of whisky and wanted to go over for it; also that you wanted me to fetch it out to you. Next time you are in town come and see me, and wow Till arrange defence. ’ ’ To Mr Hutton: The statements in the letter, which he was asked to make were untrue. Ho answered the letter but had not seen Gibbous since. He gave Gibbons’s letter to Constable Fitzpatrick. Mr Cohen: I have no questions to ask.

Constable Fitzpatrick said he saw Atkinson enter and come out of the passage which leads to the back door of the White Hart Hotel. Ho returned five minutes after entering. He had a conversation with Atkinson, who handed him a bottle of Crawford’s whisky. Ho spoke to Gibbons about 10 o’clock the following morning and said “Last night about 11 o’clock I saw a man named Atkinson enter and come out of the passage leading to your hotel and lie admitted being there for the purpose of procuring liquor. Gibbons repiled, “He did not get any.” Witness then said he had a bottle of whisky in his possession when he came out and he said he obtained it from you. Gibbons replied : ‘ 1 The bottle of whisky was purchased by Atkinson before 10v o'clock. • I saw him pay Bill W r ard for it, and he left the bottle to be called for and he did not call for it till then and I gave it to him. ’ ’ Witness repiled: ‘ ‘ The matter will be reported to the Inspector together with his explanation. ” Gibbons said: “Don’t do that, it doesn’t do me any good, appearing so often before the court and if you report it, no doubt a case will be made of it. ’ ’ He knew Ward, the barman. He next saw Gibbous on 19th when ho gave him a summons for a breach of the Licensing Act. He told Gibbons he had better be careful what he was doing with his witnesses. Gibbons asked why; witness told him he had obtained a letter from Atkinson which he stated he received from Gibbons. Gibbons said: ‘ ‘ Did Atkinson give you the letter?” Witness replied: “He did,” and Gibbons said “Well that settles it.” The letter produced was the one Atkinson gave him. Witness should say it was in Gibbons’ hand writing. Ho had given his signatures on various occasions in the book produced. Mr Cohen : I have no questions. Detective Siddells deposed that on the Ist July he had a conversation with Gibbons who said he had got himself into a nice mess in writing that letter to Atkinson. Witness asked him if ho intended to admit the letter was written by him as it would save dragging his friends into the matter and he replied ho could do nothing else but admit. Mr Cohen: I have no questions. Evidence was also given by D. W. Mason, clerk of the court.. This closed the case for the prosecution. Mr Cohen said accused had nothing to say. Ho proposed to submit points of law, and to criticise the information to show' that there was no offence. Ho challenged counsel for the prosecution to show whore there had boon any coirviction in England or Now, Zealand on account of interfering with witnesses before proceedings - wore instituted. There was nothing to show that Mr Gibbons bolioved that proceedings wore

about to be taken against him. The constable, had said ho was going to report tho matter to tho Inspector and that proceedings might be taken, but there was no evidence to make Mr Gibbons believe proceedings would be taken and, there was no evidence in New Zealand to deter a constable from instituting proceedings. Suppose Atkinson liad made a false statement to the constable it would not have been evidence. It was no more an offence to tell a lie to a constable than to a clergyman or a sweetheart. It was no offence for a person to incite another to do something that is not evidence and he submitted the information did not:disclose an offence. Mr Hntton said he did not think it necessary to, reply to the questions raised and they were of sufficient importance to be referred to a higher Court, but if His Worship desired him to go on he would do so. The Magistrate said it was quite clear there was a prima facie case and he proposed to commit accused for trial at the next sitting of Supreme Court at Wanganui. Bail was allowed, himself for £SOO and two sureties of £250 each.