WHO WAS DRIVING?

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 950, 17 April 1930, Page 1

WHO WAS DRIVING?

MAN FOUND INTOXICATED IN MOTOR-CAR FINE OF £lO IMPOSED In spite ot his plea that he was not the driver ot the motor-car, but war merely waiting for the man whom he employed as chauffeur, Patrick Man ning was fined £lO at the Police Court this morning for being intoxicated in charge of a car. The evidence showed that accused had made an attempt to start the engine. Manning, a salesman, aged 42, was charged with being intoxicated in charge of a motor vehicle in Albert Street yesterday. Mr. Smyth appeared for him and entered a plea of not guilty. Counsel said the man admitted being drunk, but was not in charge of the car. According to Constable Sherson, he had seen accused sitting in the driver's seat ot the car outside an hotel in Albert Street. He was crossing the street when a young man dashed across the road and apparently warned Manning. The young man gave his name as Fitzgerald, saying that he was employed by Manning to drive the ear. He was unable to produce a driv ing licence. Manning had escaped down the street, but was arrested later. He had been starting the car when witness had seen him. “Accused admits he was drunk and does not remember much of the rffair.’’ Mr. Smyth said. He was de prived of his licence three or four months ago at Otorohanga. and since then has employed a young man to drive for him. He is a salesman, ami the car is necessary to earn his live lihood.” Manning had been driven to town yesterday by Fitzgerald, and bought some stock at a warehouse. While Fitzgerald was speaking to a voung woman some distance from the car, accused and another man had been sitting in the car. Manning had no intention of driving, but was watting for Fitzgerald. James Edward Fitzgerald said he was employed by Manning as a driver | He had a driving licence, but bad left iit at his home in Hamilton. Manning ; had not driven the car since witness i had been in his employ. • Manning corroborated his counsel's i statement. j “He was the owner of the car and he 1 was sitting in the driver’s seat ” com- ! piented the magistrate. “He was j drunk, aud if he had not been stopped l.e would have driven the car away IHe ought to be prohibited, and he | must sit in the back seat in future.” i Accused was fined £lO, and given j 14 days in which to find the money. ■■lt will be gaol next time,” the rnagisI irate added