STAR AND GARTER HOTEL.

Press, Volume LXIII, Issue 12852, 10 July 1907, Page 2

STAR AND GARTER HOTEL.

THE LICENSE ENDORSED. At the Magistrate's Court yesterday, before Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M., George Roper, licenseo of the fStar ami G.irter Hotel, was chirged with permitting drunkenness on iiie preinisce, and also gambling, namely, playing quoite lor drinks.

Henry John Young, who resided three- or four chains from the Star and Garter Hot<?l t said thut as ho was passing the istar and Garter Hotel on June loth, he saw a man named Win. Barrett fall on the footpath outsidts th«i hotel, and later saw his brother and Sir Roper tako him into the private part of the house. The bariuau then took him home.

-Matilda Barrett, wife of Wm. Barrett, said that on the date in question her husband was druuk when he came home about midday. Ho remained there until 6 o'clock in the evening, and then went out again. He was brought home that night with a <uit face, and a doctor had to be sent for. Her husband was in a bad 6tate for live or cix days after this. Daniel Buckett said that on June 15th last he saw Barrett in the Star and Garter Hotel in company with a man named Patterson, with whom ho played quoits. Bariett was not sober nt the time, and took his coat and hat off so as to be able to play with more freedom. Roper made him put them on again, and, in witness's opinion, he must have seen them playing quoits. VV itness saw Barrett and Patterson have a drink. There hod been a bit of a disturbance over union wages between Barrett and witness. The game required skill. . . Arthur Patterson said that he visited the hotel and played bagatelle for drinks. Mr Roper was there, and he was playing himself. A man named Ward paid him for a game of bagatelle, and shouted for two drinks. Barrett waa there, and Roper got him by the coat, and, after pushing him along the passage, threw him out on his head on the path. Witness said to Roper, "You have split bis head open, and had better send for a doctor." Roper replied he was not going to ring up for a doctor, and the could lie I there. Mrs Roper remonstrated with her husband for throwing Barrett out. Witness wanted to telephone for a doctor, but the defendant or his porter would not allow him to use the telephone. When he was playing quoits with witness, lie was the woree for liquor. Wm. Barrett eaid that about G. 30 p.m. on June 15th he went to the Star and Garter Hotel, where he met a man named Patterson, with whom he had some drinks and also a came ot quoite. Hβ could not remember who paid for the drinke, but it wae customary to play for liquor in tho hotel. He remembered nothing more till next morning, when he was at home. Dr. Sandetein was sent for, and 6aid witness bad been very brutally treated. Mr Ruitell, who appeared for defendant, submitted that .no game of quoite wm a game of skill, and not of chance. The defendant denied that he had permittod drunkenness on the premises. He saw Barrett drive up about midday, and ordered him off the I premises, a 6 he was then drunk. He returned about six o'clock, and defendant told him to leave, but as he was noisy, defendant was forced to put him off, which he did 38 gently ac possible. Hβ had no knowledge that gambling was going on, and never played himself for drinks. Other witnesses gave evidence to the effect that Barrett was not drunk when on tho premises. The Magistrate said the charge of permitting gambling wss clearly proved, and he would fine defendant 40s and costs. On tho other charge, tlie Magistrate said that a men visited tho hotel about midday, in i drunken condition, and he was aeked to believe that ho wa3 perfectly sober. Ho did not believe anything of the sort. llio evidence for the prosecution wee perfectly elenr to his mind. Tho licensee committed a very grave breach of the Act in supplying the man with liquor. Hβ would inflict i fine of £5, and, looking at the fact of the licensee's behaviour, which was very bad throughout, he would endorse tho license.