LICENSING APPEAL.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LVII, Issue 232, 10 March 1915, Page 3

LICENSING APPEAL.

A HARD CASE. Wellington, March 8. Can a licensee be punished for premitting drunkenness upon his premises when he was unaware that such drunkenness existed ? This question was put to Mr Cooper, S.M., in the Magistrate s Court some time tago, when Christopher Jensen, licensee of the Wellington Hotel, was proceeded against for allowing drunkenness upon his premises. Defen- | dant had on that occasion pleaded not guilty. After heaving evidence, JIU Worship dismissed, the Information, on the grounds *'iat there was no evidence S ivcl) 'n behalf of the informant that respondent, while absent from the premises, had delegated his authority as licensee to a barman, and that having no knowledge that a drunken man was on the premises he could not in law be convicted of permitting drunkenness thereon, and also that he was not responsible for a wrongful act of the barman.

The police appealed against the Magistrate's decision, and Mr Justice Chapman, in his judgment, referring to the grounds of the dismissal, said lie could not accede to tliem as a proposition of law. The evidence of delegation of authority was never given, and would seldom be procurable. The delegation would lie inferred from the outstanding facts. It was enough to show that the Imrman was there, and presumably was placed there as a barman by the licensee. The appeal was allowed, and the ease was remitted to the Magistrate.

The ease came up again to-day in the Magistrate's Court. Inspector Tlendrev, did not press for a penalty, but only for a conviction. There was, he said, no question of blame as far as Jensen was personally concerned, for he kept his house very well. The Magistrate concurred that it was rather hard 011 Jensen, who had been practicalhv blame, less in the matter. Tie would enter a conviction, but in the circumstances be would impose a nominal penalty of 20 shillings.