LIQUOR SUPPLIED TO NATIVE

Dominion, Volume 14, Issue 301, 14 September 1921, Page 8

LIQUOR SUPPLIED TO NATIVE

A WAIRARAPA CASE LICENSEE’S APPEAL DISMIS ED By Telegraph-Special Correspondent. Masterton, September 13. Tn tho Supreme Court this afternSpn His Honour Mr. Justice Salmond heard tho appeal of Ivy Gamela Cooper, licensee. of the Gladstone Hotel, against her conviction by a Magistrate for sujjplying liquor to a Native for consumption off the premises. The grounds of tho appeal wero: (1) That the decision IM against the weight of evidence; and (2) that the only liquor supplied in jars by appellant on May 25 (the date of the alleged breach of tho law) was supplied to Duncan Brown, a European, end that if this liquor was transferred to the Native the transfer took place without appellant’s knowledge or consent. Mr. W. Noble appeared for tho appellant and Mr. R. R. Burridge for* the Crown.

Tho evidence called was similar to that given in the Magistrate's Court. Mr. Burridge said that -in consequence of the death of a daughter of Karauria Nomanoon, a Native labourer, a tangi Was held at tho Gladstone Maori Pa on May 24 and 25. On the latter date the Native cooks asked for beer. Namanaon told them that ho had no money, but he afterwards got a. cheque for 415 from Mr. Pike. Namanaon gave the cheque to Samy Kingi, to whom lie owed some .money. From Pike’s place the two Natives returned to tho hotel. Kingi cashed the cheque end after ho had taken the nwmev owed to him -he gave the change to.Na.manaon. The latter asked appellant to fill two 2-gallon jars with beer. This the anpellant did, and the jars were placed in Kingi’s ear by the purchaser. Mr. Noble said that the appellant thoroughly appreciated tho necessity for not selling liquor to Maoris Jor consumption off the premises. She was very particular in this respect. Appellant’s story was that a European named Duncan BrowJn asked her to fill 1 two jars. Evidence would be called to show that Kingi cashed a cheque and went outside the bar as soon as he received his change. After that Duncan Brown ordered liquor, which he said “was for his own qonsump-' tion. Airs. Cooper would deny that she saw Namanaon put the jars into tho motor-car. Evidence could be called to prove the identity of Duncan Brown. His Honour said that he would dismiss the appeal on the ground that the evidence of Kingi. contradicted and was obviously not os reliaWe as that of the Crown witness Namanaon. He could not believe the story that the beer was supplied to Duncan Brown. Costs amounting lo U 7 7s. were allowed against tho appellant.