CHARGES AGAINST A PUBLICAN.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXVIII, Issue 7947, 24 January 1906, Page 6

CHARGES AGAINST A PUBLICAN.

POLICE v. SOVVMAN. In the Magistrate's Court, at Eketabuna, yesterday, beforo Mr W. P. James, S. M., Thomas Sowinan was charged with Laving, on December 7th. permitted drunkenness on the licensed premises of the Railway Hotel. Constable C. Grey prosecuted, and briefly stated the circumstances nf the case, which were connected with a recent court case. His Worship asked if tho liceuse was produced. Mr Pownall, who appeared for defendant, stated that lie produced the license under protest. The license bad not actually been transferred, but tho lease of the hotel had been sold before tho night of the occurrence. Oliver Newton Ciaytou deposed that he knew tho night of December 7tb, He went to tho Kail way Hotel that night with Stickles and Power, between 5.30 and 9 o'clock. Defendant wa9 then in tho bar. Witness had two drinks beforo ho weut there, one iu the Club Hotel and one in the stable. lie was quite sober when ho wont to tho Railway Hotel. Tho three of them went into a little room off the bar and had a shandy-gaff. They then went to the trout bar. Mr Sowrnau "shouted" two bottles of champagne. Both of the bottles were on tho counter, at the one time. There were no fewer than six persons in the "shout." Con. Strid, Power, Stickles and witness afterwards "shouted" a bottle of champagne. Tho iiceu ;ee was in the tor when the "shouting" took place, but only partook of the caampague from the bottle he himself "snouted." Befom he left, witness was supplied by defendant with a "shandy-gaff." This was a few miuutes before 11 o'clock. When witness got outside tne liquor affected him. He was a little the worse for liquor when he came out, but not much. He went to the stable, as he felt bad, and must have gone to sle9p for some time. If he had not had the liquor, ho would not havo gone to the stables. When he awoke it would be after 12 o'clock. He then got up and went home. He was awakened by hearing Constable Grey's voice. When witness left the hotel tnose who remained did not appear much the worse for liquor. By Mr Pownall: Witness was a painter, and was 32 years of age. He was of a nervous disposition. He knew before he went to Sowman's that "fizz" was going to eventuate. Witness could not say how the champagne came to be "shouted." He would swear that two small bottles were ''shouted" by Mr Sowman. He understood the reason to be that the publlcana bad won the election on the previous day. Witness could not say vT. hetiber Mr Sowmafi "shouted" ; for other people than the Ave, al- j though others persona were coming into the bar. Witness stood up during the whole time he was in the bar, and felt no inclination to sit down. His impression was that he was .sober when in the hotel, but when he went out the fresh air took a sudden effect upon him, and ho became drank. Witness was not asked by Sowman to "shout." If Sowßaatt had not M about3d" champagne the rest would probably not have "shouted." Whisky or other drinks would have had the same effect. Constable Grey anid this was the only evidence on the charge of permitting drunkenness. Mr Pownall suggested that on the uncorroborated evidence of the one witness the case should no dismissed. His Worship thought that the fact that Clayton had gone to the stable to sleep called for a defence. Mr Pownall disagreed on this point. His Worship baid they should bear the other charges against the licensee,^ Mr Pownalll agreed to this course, but on hearing from Contaable Grey that the evidence of other witnesses was the same as that of Clayson, he submitted that charges of "encouraging and inoiting to drink," and of allowing gambling on the premises should not call for a defence. His Worship not think the case of "permitting drunkenness" was a strong one. The law required that the licensed persor should have a knowledge that the person be waa serving was drunk. Inspector G. H. Jenkinson , was called for tho defence. He deposed that when in Eketabana be boarded at Mr Sowman's Railway Hotel, which he considered very well conducted indeed. On the nigbt of December 7th witness slept at the .Railway Hotel in a room above the bar. He went to bed about 10 o'clock that night, and waa not disturbed. He saw no drinking before he retired. He 'was in a sittingroom opposite the bar early in the evening. William Stickles deposed that on the night of December 7th he suggested to Clayton that they should go to the Railway Hotel. During the day he had been talking to Sowman about bis entire, Bonnie Scotland. Sowman suggested that one of these days the horse would kill witness. Witness said he would bring the horse in and put him on the counter. Sowman said he would "shout" a bottle of champagne if witness did. Witness took a photograph of Bonnie Scotland and put it on tho counter. This was the reason why Sowman "shouted." Witness could not say if one or two bottles were "shouted." He was not drunk during tho evening, neither was Clayton. About four or five bottles of champagne were "shouted." Witness left the hotel about 10 minutes to 11. By Constable Grev: Witness went to the hotel for a bit of fun. By the Bench: If Sowman had not shouted, witness would probably not have done so. Alexander Ure deposed that he was in the Railway Hotel on the night cf December 7tb. Ho was not under the influence of liquor, aud saw nobody else under the influence. Witness was speaking to Clayton for several minutes outside the hotel, and he did not then appear to be the worse for liquor. He would not, swear that Clayton was absolutely sober. F. 0. Fox, painter, deposed that Clayton was in hie employ, and stayed at hia house, He baa for-

bidden Clayton to come home under the influence of liquor. On the night of December 7th, Clayton came home shortly after 12 o'clock. When he arrived, witness got up and looked into the kitchen. He found Ciaytou having bis supper. Witness noticed nothing in his ap pearance to justify the opinion that Clayton was the worse for drink. Clayton was generally a sober man, but had occasional "bouts." iSy Constable Gny: Witness bad not asked that a prohibition order be issued against Clayton. Ho had asked the Constable to hold the order over. John Wallace deposed that he was nt the Railway llotel, on the night of December 7tb. He left at about 10 o'clock. When he left he did not considor CJnytou under the influence of liquor. • Robert McGlone, a railway employee, stated that he was in aud out of the hotel on the night of December Ttb. He saw Clayton and others in the -hotel about 10.30 p.m., but did not notice any of them the worse for ilquor. Fred. Coe, also a railway servant, gave corroborative evidence. He was in the hotel from 8.30 until about 10 o'clock, and saw no signs of druukouness. Alexander Ure, recalled, state 1 that on the night in question he had a friendly game of enchro in the hotel with Strid. There was no money on the game They had not clayed for money or drinks. Strid won the game and paid for tho drinks. Cornelius Strid deposed to having been in the hotel on the night of December 7th. Witness had some champagne, and "shouted" a bottle. He did not see any person the worse for liquor. Witness played a game of euchre with Ure. It was a friendly game and was not for,drinks. This was the case for the defence, His Worship stated that, so tar as permitting drunkenness on the premises it must be shown that the licensee of the hotel had a guilty knowledge. There was no evidence to show that, at the time he was giving the drink, Sowman was aware that Clayton was drunk. As far as . inoiting and encouraging people to drink; witness had his doubts on the point. The occasion of tho prohibition poll having been in favour of the publicans might have been some excuse for Sowman "shouting." However, it wap an exceedingly foolish thing for him to have done. He had himself to thank for the positiun he was in. The whole of tho cases would te dismissed.—Eketahuna Express.