THE POLICE AND HOTELS.

Press, Volume LII, Issue 15752, 20 November 1916, Page 4

THE POLICE AND HOTELS.

POAYERS FXDER THE AVAR It EH ULATIOX S. ■ Another instance of the particularly couiprehonsivc character of the "war [ regulations a* relating: to hotels came before the Auckland Police Court on Thursday, when Fredrick C. Bass, licensee of the British Hotel, was eharged that on Friday week last he /ailed to afford two ppiice constables immediate entry to part of his licensed premises to wit his office. l>r. Bamford, /or defendant, entered a plea of guilty. Sulj-Inspector Mellvency (romai-ks tho "Star"'), stated that the case was the first of tiie kind under the war regulations. Two constables had reason to suspect that a man who entered the British Hotel was a bookmaker, and they followed him. "When they got inside the place they could not locate their man, and, after they had looked in tho bar anil in adjacent rooms, they found that the licensee's private office, adjoining the bar, was locked. They asked the licensee to open tho office, lie declared that there were no liookmnkers there, and declined to unlock the officc, whereon the c-onstables departed. Later the licensee called on the sneaker, and said he was afraid that he had done something he should not have done, but that he was unaware at the time that the war regulations gave the police full right of the search of licensed premises. Dr. Banvford stated that when the constables called the licensee was up stairs, he having previously locked his office and gone to another part of Alio hotel. He was called to the bar at the request of the constables, the offico being still locked as he had left it. He resented the attentions of tho police to his house, and stood on his disunity, and declined to open his offico. It was not until, later when the matter was mentioned by a uolice-sergeant, that he was aware that his action was an infringement of the war regulations, as the constables had made no mention whatever of proceeding under the authrritv of the war regulations. Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M., remarked tli at the -osition had arisen largely through a misunderstanding, and fined defendant £2 and 7s costs.