TROUBLE OVER A MEAL

Dominion, Volume 22, Issue 12, 9 October 1928, Page 8

TROUBLE OVER A MEAL

RESTAURANT-KEEPER’S SON ASSAULTED ASSAILANT FINED Alleging that a customer had entered his restaurant on Saturday evening and had walked out without paying for his meal of whitebait fritters, Spiro Bardebes stepped into the witness-box of the Magistrate’s Court yesterday to give evidence against Thomas Henry Spring, a contractor, aged 4G, who had pleaded not guilty to a charge of having obtained credit by fraud in incurring a debt of 2s. for a meal. A charge of having assaulted Bardebes’ son Peter was admitted. Before Bardebes gave evidence, SubInspector Lander said that accused went to Spiro’s Cafe, Lambton Quay, on Saturday evening. He ordered and partook of a meal and then left without paying. Bardebes sent his son to follow accused, who, when accosted, assaulted the youth, and then, on coming back io the cafe, denied that he had had a meal there. „ . . . : A waitress gave evidence that she had supplied Spring witli whitebait fritters, but could not say whether he had paid or not She was certain that accused had not gone out without being served. Spiro senior said that he saw Spring conic in, but did not see him supplied with n meal. After Spring had left, witness looked at his plate, which, was empty, There was, however, a ticket for 2s. on the table. Witness had seen Spring go out and had called out Cash, but' had received no answer. W Vnneh explained that he did not. take niuch notice of those who came in, but that he certainly did take notice of those " To'm” D. Perry (representing Spring) Bardebes stated that when he found out that his son had been assaulted, he hit Perry: You’re rather warlike, aren’t you? Mr^'Pcrry 1 ; oYou’ve 0 You’ve been in a couple of thing i£ pS ne ß^rdebTFthe y n ! gave .evidence, and said that he followed Spring, who, when spoken to, denied having had a meal nt the restaurant, and who hit him three times. They then returned to the restaMr.ntPerrv submitted that the evidence fell short of establishing the charge. It had been ascertained that Spring had sufficient money on him to pay for_a meal had he desired one. Counsel contended that his client could not be classed ns being in the same position as a man who went into a restaurant, and ordered a meal when he knew that he could not pay for it. In that case, he would be causing the proprietor to imply that Ins customer could pay. _, The Magistrate (Mr. J. H- Salmon, SAI.) said that there appeared to be an absence of any element of fraud, and accordingly dismissed the charge.• On the charge of the assault, which Ml. Salmon considered to be unprovoked, acmised was fined £3. in default fourteen days’ imprisonment. “Half, the fine is to'be paid to the boy,’’ said Mr. Salmon. “By this means the restaurant keeper will be recouped.” _