Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

LIQUOR ON SUNDAY.

THE EIGHTS OF A BOARDER, AN INTERESTING POINT. Some points of interest to licensees were involved in a case which was heard by Mr. A, Crooke, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Alexander Sanson, the licensee of the Okato Hotel, was charged with unlawfully supplying liquor to Michael Malone and Alexander Fraser on Sunday, April 16, when his licensed premises should have been closed. Sub-Inspector Fouliy prosecuted, and Mr. A. H. Johnstone appeared for the defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Malone and Fraser, who are in camp at Trentham, gave evidence that on Sunday, April 10, they left Malone's place at Riverlea in Malone's motor car for the purpose of going round the mountain. They were joined by two ladies at Pihama. They drove round the mountain and in the afternoon they stopped in the Okato Hotel, where they saw Carl Andrews. Andrews'said: "Come in And have a refreshment," addressing this remark to all. The four went into a private room and Andrews brought in five drinks. Andrews paid for these drinks, and then witness, Malone, paid for another round.

To Mr. Johnstone: Witness never saw Sanson. He gave his -money for the drinks to Andrews.

In his evidence Fraser said they spoke to Andrews for awhile, and. then Andrews asked them to have a drink. They acepted the invitation, and went into a private room at the hotel. They had drinks with Andrews, and then another round, for which Malone paid. They were in the hotel for. a quarter of an hour or twenty minutes. They did not buy any drink to take away from the hotel. Going home that night they had an accident, which unfortunately "ended fatally. ■ * POLICE PROCEDURE CRITICISED. At this stage Mr. Johnstone objected to the question of an accident being imported into a case on which it had no bearing. It was improper, he said, for a police officer to use this case to extort evidence which might be used in another direction. It was obvious that the police were suggesting that these men bought liquor at the hotel, and that the liquor was the cause of the -subsequent fatal accident.

The magistrate supported the objection and luled the evidence inadmissible.

Sub-Inspector Fouhy: This party ran into another vehicle going .home and an occupant was killed; * ' '

Mr. Johnstone: Or, in other words, the other vehicle ran into this party. Here Sub-Inspector Fouhy objected to the continual interruptions of counsel, but the magistrate observed that the court would protect Jiim, and that tlie police must conduct an examination and not a cross-examination about something else. | After further evidence was given the police case was closed. ' ' ' AN INTERESTING DEFENCE. Mr. Johnstone said the facts werq not greatly in-dispute. -- When, the, party reached the Okato Hotel they met Andrews and as the men were on final leave he asked them to come in and have a drink. Andrews paid for the first drink, and Sanson did not appear on the scene. Later Malone gave Andrews the money for more drinks. Counsel* submitted that Andrews, as a boarder, had a perfect right to buy drinks for his guests. The magistrate pointed out that Malone, who was not a boarder, bought drinks.

Mr. Johnstone contended that Sanson was not concerned in the purchase. Money was given by Malone to Andrews, who bought drinks. • Andrews was the purchaser of tlip drinks.

The magistrate: If that was permissible you might as well wipe out all the licensing laws. Mr. Johnstone said he was there to defend Sanson, who was charged with selling liquor to Malone and to Fraser. There was no evidence that Sanson sold liquor to either of these men, and he submitted that it had to be proved that Sanson sold liquor to the men mentioned in the charge. The magistrate: Sanson ought to know that when two or three men go into a hotel one man does not pay for drinks twice in sucession.

After hearing the evidence of Sanson and Andrews, which was to the effect that Andrews purchased the drinks and no money was handed to Sanson by anyone but Andrews, the Magistrate reserved his decision.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TDN19160427.2.11

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Taranaki Daily News, 27 April 1916, Page 2

Word count
Tapeke kupu
693

LIQUOR ON SUNDAY. Taranaki Daily News, 27 April 1916, Page 2

LIQUOR ON SUNDAY. Taranaki Daily News, 27 April 1916, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert