R.M. COURT.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XIII, Issue 4235, 5 October 1892, Page 3

R.M. COURT.

MASTERTON-WEDNESDAY. (Beforo Messrs T, E. Prico and J. Gardiner, J.P.'s) PRomrailos.

Police V Mackay.—Thomas Mackay was charged with supplying Thomas Jago, & prohibited person, with liquor on Monday, tbo 3rd inst, Sergeaut McArdlo asked leave to amend tbo information by the addition of tho word " intoxicating," Permission was granted, Sergeant McArdlo said that he proposed to call evidence to show that Thomas Mackay, well knowing that Thomas Jago was a prohibited person, supplied him with intoxicating liquor —to wit, beer— on tbo 3rd inst. Mr Skipper, who appeared for the defendant, objected to tho case proceeding unless the origiual order una W>> produced, It was necessary that the • order be drawn out and signed. The entry in the minute book was not euQicient, The Court was of opinion that the order was genuine, and that the entry in the record book was sufficient, Mr Skipper aeked the Court to make a note of his objection, The order must be made, lie contended, according to tho Justices of the Peace Act, and drawn up and lodged with tho Registrar. The Bench was of opinion that the proceedings were quite in order, and decided to hear evidence The Clerk of the Court (Mr Tbbotson) produced tbo book containing tho order made prohibiting Thomas Jago,

By Mr Skipper: Tho reason wliy Mr Jago did not appear when tho! order was made was that he was attending a funeral. Did not know whether the notice of the order had been officially served on Mr Jago, Thomas Jago, on oath, admitted M having been told that a prohibition order was out against him, and said: I had a glass of beer at the Club Hotel on tho 3rd icst, I went into a room and I took the 'beer. I did not know it was left- there for me, I went in with no person, I will positively swear that I did not know the beer was left for me, Three or four persons were present, Frazi, Mackay, Skipper and others were there. I will swear that I was not told a glaBS of beor was there, I will Bwear I do not know who brought in the glass of beer, I did not ask anybody to get it for me, I took the beer and drank it, I went into the hotel having business with the Maoris and found the glass of beer. Perhaps I was so far gone that 1 took up another man's glass. Did not seo Mr Elkins immediately after I drank the glass of beer. Did notseobim speak to Mackay, The barman came to me and told me that

he bad orders not to let mo have anything, Ido not remember him say-A-iofl anything to Mackay. The bar*man took the glass out of my band. I was in company with Mackay on the samo evening and went to the back of Mr Thompson's hotel, Mr Mackay brought mo out some beer. That was the only time he procured me beer. It was in a bottle, I will swear, as far as my recollection goes, that Mackay only procured me the ono bottle of beer on that day, By Mr Skipper: I was not present when the order was made against me, I was told by a good many that it was only a threat, and the order had not been made. I got no official notice. I was told by eome of tho hotelkcepers thatlwaß prohibited, I never saw the order posted up. I told Mr Mackay that I did not believo there was an order against me, I also told Mr Tucker the same. I could not say that Maokay distinctly asked me if there was an order against me before procuring the liquor, but I had preriously told him that I did not beliovo there was was an order against me. / Allr Mackay might hare been taking beer to bis own place, As tar as I am awaro no one saw me drink the beer.

By Sergeant Mo Ardlo: I was somewhat muddled on the occasion one cannot swear to all that occurred. John Tucker, barman at tbo Clul Hotel, Bwore that between four anc five o'clock on the 3rd, Mr Mackaj ordered five drinks. Mr Jac,o wai not in the room at tlio time, Afterwards saw Mr Jago walk into tlio room, and remembering he was a prohibited person went buck to the room and found Jago in the act of of drinking a mug of beer. K nocked bis elbow and spilt the bear saying, " What do you mean, Jago," Then turned round and told the company that if anything.of the sort occurred again he would report it. By Mrtikipper: As soon as I hecame awaro that Mr Jago mt prohibited I stopped supplying him, and told others I would report them if I caught anyone supplying him. There jsere five gentlemen in the room withJago. In uiy opinion I do not think that Mr Mackay had the least idea that Jago was about when he ordered the five drinks, I could not say whose beer it was that Jago drank. A. A, Eikins, licensee of the Club Hotel, recollected his barman reporting the occurrence, Hud spoken to Mr Mackayaboutsupplying a prohibited person, and Mr Mackay said that ho did not know Jago was prohibited, otherwise he would not bare done it, Alice Mcintosh, barmaid at the Empire Hotel, recollected Monday afternoon. Saw Mr Jago standing

outside tbo Empire Hotel. Mr Mackay was iniide, Maokay went out and spoke to Jago, Ho afterwards came back and obtained two bottles of heer, Askod him who they were for. He said they were to take homo for 1 supper, Told Mr Thompson of the occurrence. By Mr Skipper: Mr Mackay came for beer occasionally. It was not an extraordinary thing for him to do, T. D, Thompson, licensee of the Empire Hotel, deposed to having gono to the hack of his hotel on Monday evenins! last, in consequence of his barmaid telling him that Mr Mackay had purchased t>' : o bottles of beer. She also said she believed it was for Jago although Mackay had denied it* Went to the back and Baw Jagn nr.rf Mackay standing. Jago had his arm raised as if drinking. Sergeant McArdle gave evidence to tho tffeot that' ho was talking to Mackay soon after Jago's prohibition order was taken out. Ho had then made Mr Mackay aware of it. It was about the 22nd or 23rd August, Thomas Mackay was next put into the box at the request of Mr Skipper, He denied supplying Air Jugo at the Club Hotel. Mr Jago knew nothing about it. The botr boti|{lit at the Empiro Hotel was for his own use, He invariably used the passage leading lo tho back of Thompson's Hotel as a near cut to his home. Met Jago as he was going homo and gnvo hi w a bottle of beor ns Jago was not looking well. It was uot premeditated. Did not believe that Jago was prohibited until Mr Elkius told liim. Mr Skipper raised an objection to the information as it elated that the liquor was unlawfully "procured." He contended it was not unlawfully procured. Tl«! Bench decided that tho case nas clearly proved against the defendant, As it was tho first case of the kind that had como beforo the Court Hiey considered that Ihe ends of JUB» tice would be met by tho imposition of a small fine, In all future cases, however, the full penalty would be inflicted, The polico wcro to bn complimented on their action in the matter, as it was a well-known fact that cases of this kind were difficult to prove, A fine of 20s would be inflicted with Hs costs, or in default three days' imprisonment, Defendant was given until to-morrow morning to pay tho line.

CARTERTON.-TUESDAY, (Before Colonel Roberts, R. M.) James Bayliss vO, Forbes, Judgment summons for £8 Is Gd. Mr Acheson for judgment creditor. To bo paid within soven days, in default seven days imprisonment, E. Blake v C. Blake. Mr Izard for plaintiff, Mr Acheson for the defendant. Thisis a case in which the plaintiff seeks to obtain possession of certain tenements at Dalefield, The plaintiff deposed that about nine years ago be put his son (the defendant) in possession of the pioperty, with the understanding that he (the plaintiff) was to go and live with him and work about the place, There was no other arrangement made between them. A notice to quit the premises had been served on the defendant by his (the plaiutills) luwyers from Dunedin about twelve months ago last February, On tho 2nd of June last in the presence of Mr Gordon, the plaintiff asked defendant to leave tho premises and ho refused to go unless ho got £SO and a month's notice,

To Mr Acheson: I believe my son has been in occupation about uiuu years, Ho has paid no rent. I never made any agreement about paying any rent. It was bush land when ho fhst went to livo there.

Cross-examined by Mr Izard: The reason that I want to get my son out is on account of a family quarrel, James Gordon deposed to knowing tho parties in this action, and was also present when the father asked the son to leave the premises. The son refused to leave unless he got .£SO compensation, The plaintiff was nonsuited, with costs,