CLOSING OF HOTELS.

Taranaki Daily News, 13 December 1918, Page 7

CLOSING OF HOTELS.

, BBEACHJIS Of HEALTH R£GU- ! - LATIDXS., »£W PLYMOUTH PXJBIJOANS ram The hearing of the rchargeg against, Wm. George licence of the fioyal Hotai, and Maria McKeaii, licensee of tlie Criterion Hotel, of having tlieir oars open during the (Stlrrejicy of tlie Health Department's order requiring them to ibe closed for the purpose of more effectually checking and event ■ ing the spread of influenza, was continued at the Magistrate's Court yesterday morning before Mr A- Crooke, S.M. Sub-Inspector. Hutton represented tlie police and Mr A. H. Johnstone appeared for defendants. Sub-Inspector Hutton submitted the Gazette notice declaring influenza an in fectious disease, also that con/erring certain powers on health officers under the Public Health Act. and that notifying the appointment of Robert Ilaldane Makgill as a district health offlcer. He further put in a telegraphic communication from the Minister of Public Health, intimating that the order closing hotel bars was issued with big approval. He also urged that, while at the previous hearing it had been eontended and admitted that the weaning of the word "bar" in the notice was a bar as defined by the Licensing Act, the notice was capable of a much wider interpretation than that given, and was to !be read as meaning all or any bars in any hotel. Mr Johnstone admitted that the documents put in provided the necessary proof for which he contended, and that everything appeared to! have been done in order. He also agreed to admit the evklenoe put in as applicable to both cases. He further admitted that the back, or private, bar of Mrs McKean's hotel had been open and-that liquor had been sold. He held, however, that the room in which the liquor was sold was not a bar within the meaning of the Licensing Act. nor within the meaning of the order closinrr hotel bars. It was his contention that nothing, else than the public bar of a licensed hotel could be meant, and as the ibar in which the liquor was sold did not open immediately on to a public street, it could not be such a bar. The Magistrate said that if Mr Johnstone's contention was uiheld it would mean that a publican could have served all and sundry in any other room of his hotel and so have nullified the whole object for which the order had Veen issued—that of preventing the congregation of peoole. for the purpose of checking the spread of an infections disease. If a bur opened in+o n passage, which opened into a street, he thought that that must b« a bar according to tho meaning of the Licensing Act, also according to the ruling of the Ch : ef Justice in the case of t'V Police v. Ooin'n. Mr Johnstone said that if the Health Inspector intended to close private bars lie had full powers to do so under the Public Health Act. hut no mention had been made of anything but hotel bars, and as bars had been defined by the Licensing Act. the word must be read according to its lejal definition. Tlie Magistrate further pointed out that the order referred to all or any hotel and as it was drawn out in popular laneuage he thought the inten tion must be read to apply to all places where liouor was sold. Mr Johnstone said that as the charge was laid r.nder a highlv penal statute he was entitled to ask for the strictest interpretation of the order. The language of the order was that of a layman, and was not apt for the ptir:pose for which it was intended. He ! snbmitted that the question for the bench was whether or not it was possible to give a wider interpretation to the [meaning of the word "bar" than that given in the Lioensin? Act, and he held under the circumstances that that could not he done. Mr Crook * said that as the cases were brought under the Public Health Act he did not feel bound to anv .definition of a-bar given in the Licensing Act, nor need he rely on the opinion of the Chief Justice. thou?h that appeared to be in the direction of holding that the bar of th» Criterion, in which the tlquor was j sold was a bar acnording to the Act. H" relied on the words of the order, which he thought should he given a liberal interpretation. and meant- the closinfj of every ulaee wherein'Jiflurir was wild.' He therefore convicted in each, and injnosed fines of £5 (costs 7s). He intimated that if an anneal was contemplated he would make the fine £5, hut Mr Johnstone said be did not wish to appeal.