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

KAIAPOI.

Monday, December 7. (Before R. Beetham, Esq., S.M., aud E. Feldwick, Esq., J. P.) Breach o* Liornsino Act.—Jas. Stevenson, licensee of the Royal Hotel, was charged with permitting drunkenness in his hotel on November 21st, and with unlawfully supplying drink to Thomas Gillon while intoxicated. Mr Kippenberger for defendant- R. Mar sack, detective, deposed that he had known Thomas Gillon six or seven years; he belonged to the criminal class, and was intemperate in his habits. J. Solomon kuew Gillon, who was whitebaiting at Ashley. On November 21st Gillon took witness's netawayat 5.30 a.m., and witness was looking for him to 2.30 p.m. When he met him Gillon was then sober. Alfred Bramley stated he gave Gillon a lift in his vehicle from Ashley into Woodend on that date. Gillon had no flask, and was quite sober. G. Wheeler, licensee Sefton Hotel, was at home all day in his bar on 2let. Gillon did not come that day, as witness was on the look-out for him, Gillon on the 18th having stolen two flasks of whisky. Missed no brandy. W. Morris and W. Vincent gave evidence that Gillon was sober when he left the Royal. J. B. Moody said he saw two small beers supplied to Gillon (now deceased) im the bar, and he believed he might have had another. Witness left the hotel at 6.30 p.m., when Gillon was under the influence of liquor. Gillon got the worse of drink between going there and leaving. J. Bailey gave evidence that Gillon had two beers in the bar beside what was taken into the card room. The defendant refused to give him drink when he went away in the waggon. Gillon was capable when he left, and witness noticed no difference in his condition when he came to the hotel and when he left. G. McQuillan stated that deceased shouted witness a drink at 7 p.m., which Stevenson served. Deceased had no drink at that time. He seemed to have been drinking. To Mr Kippenberger— Did not see Gillonpay for it. H. T. Beaven, carrier, Christchurch to Aniberley, called at the Royal Hotel on November 21st, at 6 p.m. Saw Gillon (now deceased), who looked as if he had taken a glass or two. Witness was there an hour and a half, and when he left Gillon seemed worse; he staggered a bit; he was the worse for drink, but not incapable. Gillon got on the waggon to go to his camp. At Mrs Cassidy's store Gillon got off the waggon, and fell on the road. A flask of cognac fell out of Gillon's pocket, which was handed to witness. When Gillon got on the waggon again he demanded the brandy, and opened it about a mile from the hotel. It was a big flask. Deceased drank out of it. Opposite Mr T. Wilson's Gillon fell off the waggon and was left by witness with some people who were there. Gillon shouted a drink for witness before the waggon started, but they refused to give Gillon any drink. To Mr KippenWger—Was sure the brandy bottle was fulL Deceased had one or two good drinks out of it. M. Rudd gave evidence that Gillon fell on getting down from the waggon at Mrs Cassidy's store, a quarter of a mile from the hotel, and was the worse for drink. Mrs Cassidy, W. J owis and Constable Roebe g»ve evidence. Xbie eiwtd the ctse.

Mr Kippenberger said he had no case to answer. He could call witnesses who were in the hotel, who would give evidense to the same effect as those who were there. Gillon had four small beers, but had been refused by the landlord, and no sale to him was shown. The Magistrate said it was clear Gillon was drunk when he readied Mrs Caesidy's, but it was shown he had been stealing at Sefton Hotel, and might have been stealing drink at the Royal, the cases must be dismissed. Civil Casks.—F. Egan v Mary Farrell, £17 10s on judgment summons. Defendant on oath stated when she entered the Winchester Hotel her brother-in-law found the money. He held a bill of sale over her. She gave a cheque for the amount in question when goimr up to the hotel, and said it would be met, but she had to see her brother-in-law about it. She had no means to pay the claim. No order made, J. McLachlan v P. Greible, £1 0s 6d, for threshing. Judgment for plaintiff.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/CHP18961208.2.39.2

Bibliographic details

Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9594, 8 December 1896, Page 6

Word Count
750

KAIAPOI. Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9594, 8 December 1896, Page 6

KAIAPOI. Press, Volume LIII, Issue 9594, 8 December 1896, Page 6

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