TERRACES HOTEL CHARGES

Taupo Times, Volume III, Issue 149, 3 December 1954, Page 5

TERRACES HOTEL CHARGES

Several charges to the alleged sale of liquor at the Terraces Hotel °n Sunday, July 11, 1954, were heard in the Magistrate's Court, Taupo, on Friday, November 26, before Mr W. A. Harlow, S.M. Gladys Mary Fearnley, licensee of the Terraces Hotel, was charged with selling liquor at a tjme when the hotel was directed to be closed, with exposing liquor for sale and with opening the premises for the sale of liquor. Maurice Michael O'Connor, barman, was charged with supplying liquor when the persons supplied were not entitiled lawfully to be supplied. Royden George Mitchell was similarly charged. Mrs Fearnley entered pleas of not guilty, the other defendants pleading guilty. Senior-Sergeant P. Alsop conducted the prosecution, and Mr Tompkins appeared for Mrs Fearnley and O'Connor. ) Case For Prosecution Senior-Sergeant Alsop stated in evidence that when the police party arrived from Rotorua at four ten p.m. the two doors of the public bar, a detached building, were closed. One was locked but the other, through whjich the 'party entered was not. There were twenty-two persons in the bar, including Maoris and Europeans, male and female, and two small children, and the picture presented was of normal afternoon trade on a week day. Partrons were 1 ranged against the bar counter, some on stools and some standing. i The bar presented a clean appear- t ance.

The two men were dispensing liquor behind |he bar. O'Connor said he was the barman. Mitchell said he was staying at the hotel and had been asked by O'Connor to give a hand. Witness said he interviewed both men, separately, and took down their replied at the time. Mr Tompkins objected to the admission of Mr Alsop 's notes on the ground that admissions by the barmen were not evidence; against the licensee. The Magistrate, Mr Harlow, said he would admit them, and noted Mr Tompkin's objection.

Witness stated that in reply to questions O'Connor had said he was the head barman, that he lived on the premises, that he opened up about four p.m., that there were no guests in the bar, they were all outsiders. He was just carrying out his normal duties. Mitchell had helped before on Saturdays. Witness stated that the girl in the hotel office had stated that Mrs Fearnley as far as she knew hac. gone to Rotorua. Tq Mr Tompkins, witness said he had asked O'Connor if he had received any special instructions from Mrs Fearnley before she left and he had replied that he had not. Defendants' Interviewed Sergeant P. A. Byrne gave evidence similar to that of the previous witness. On the following day, acting on Departmental instructions, he had interviewed defendant at the hotel, together with Sergeant Hunt. He asked her if she wished to make any explanation of the incidents of the previous day and she said she would prefer not to. She had no objection to his seeing her barman O'Connor. Mrs Fearnley remained while he questioned him.

O'Connor said he opened the bar about five minutes before the police came. He had gone in to clean up. There were two or three persons about when he opened the door. Witness had asked whether 22 people arrived within five minutes and O'Connor replied that they must have.

Asked ho\v did the people go in, did they follow-in in "a mob when he opened the door, O'Connor replied yes. Asked did he take steps to put them out, he replied no. Asked whether he had the kefy of the bar-, O'Connor had said yes. All the time, day and night? Yes. Witness stated that he then asked Mrs Fearnley, who had been sil-

ent throughout, whether that was correct, that O'Connor had keys of the bar all the time. She had replied yes, that that was part of his responsibility.

Witness said they then departed and Mrs Fearnley said some person must have a grudge against her and must be writing to the police in Rotorua. / Small Child On Bar Sergeant Allen Hunt gave evidence as to raiding the bar on the Sunday afternoon. Several vehicles were parked near the bar which was fifty yards from the back entrance to the hotel. Hd could hear a hubbub of voices from outside as usually heard from a hotel bar during legal hours. The noise 'died down when he entered the bar. There was one small child sitting on the bar counter and there was a pram in the bar. For the defence, Mr Tompkins said the main facts were not in dispute. His main purpose was to make sure the facts as far as Mrs Fearnley was concerned were brought out fully. It was an entirely isolated instance. There had been a f ootball match that day and several carloads of people' ?aught the barman when he was sleaning and restocking the bar, importuned him for a drink and he *ave in. Giving evidence, defendant said

sne naa mstructed O Connor he was to sell liquor to lodgers only and that- he had carried out these instructions except on this occasion. She was not absent very often. She had been to Rotorua that day to bring back members of her staff who had been in thq hospital. Witness stated that since the offence occurred in July there had been no further lapses on O'Connor's part. He was still in her employ. He had assured her the offence would not recur. Mr Harlow, S.M., summing up, stated that there could not be any doubt about the main question. It

was a very clear case where the licensee was vicariously liable for the acts of her servant. The defendant would be convicted on the charge of selling. This was the second conviction within nine months. He would not endorse the licensq on this occasion. If defendant came before the Court again in comparable circumstances in the relatively near future she would find it difhcult to avoid an endorsement of the license. These cases got into the papers and they were faced with a positive scandal. The presence of Maori wompn, and of young children,! showed deplorable conditions. Defendant would be fined thirty-five pounds, with costs one pound. The other defendants were convicted, Mitchell being fined £2/10/with costs £1, and O'Connor £5 with I costs £1.