HOTELS AND LOCAL OPTION DAY.

Evening Post, Volume LIX, Issue 10, 12 January 1900, Page 6

HOTELS AND LOCAL OPTION DAY.

THE QUESTION OF CLOSING. The licensee of the Johnsonville Hotel, Thomas Bould. was charged before the Magistrate to-day with having on 6th December, being the day on which the local option poll was taken, sold intoxicating liquor to one Wm. Hume between the hours of noon and 7 p.m. Inspector Pender represented the police, and Mr. Skerrett defended. Constable Hutton deposed that he went to the hotel about 4 in the afternoon. The bar was closed on that occasion. There was a cart standing in front and a number of men were peeping round a corner of the house, while two men were in the sitting-room. He went away, and returned 15 minutes later, entering by the main entrance, which was wide open. Inside, in front of the main bar door, two men named Stannard and Hume were in the act of drinking, defendant being behind the bar. Witness asked defendant why his house and bar were open, and Bould replied, " Can't I supply travellers?" and pointed to Hume, who at once said he shouted. Stannard said — " Well, I'm a traveller ; I came from the Taita." Hume asked Hutton to come away and speak quietly to him, but^he refused. Witness saw several other people going in and out of the hotel after ;hat. The front bar door was closed. To Mr. Skerrett — >F-rom the appearance Df the liquor the men were drinking he judged it to be beer, or ' shandy gaff," and port wine and lemonade respectively. Wm. Hume deposed that defendant cave him a drink — shouted for him. Witness had had rum and cloves, but he

did not know what Stanuarcl had. Did not say 1o Hutton that he shouted for Stannard, and did not pay for any drink. Went into the hotel to return a coat, and on telling Bould that he had had influenza, defendant said he had better have a drink. To Mr. Skerrett — Lived at Ohariu, and had just come in. Was friendly with the Boul-d family. To the Magistrate — Was 20 years of age. John Stannard, driver, of Johnsonville, said he had driven cattle from Taita that morning, and in the afternoon had a glass of gingerale at defendant's hotel. Preferred gingerale to beer when thirsty. This .concluded the case for the prosecution. Mr. Skerrett's address was brief, but to the point: — "Of course I admit that there is no case whatever to answer." In giving his decision the Magistrate said: — "Some people think that the law prohibiting the sale of liquor on particular days has been passed because there is something intrinsically wrong in taking any liquor upon days such as the day of the general election. The real reason for the Statute was to prevent the disgraceful scenes of riot and debauchery which arose on election day from having the public houses open. The Legislature found it impossible to frame an Act which in its language would provide for moderation and repress excess. If the evil can be reduced to what appears to have taken place in this present instance the object of the Legislature has been effected. Of course, theoretically and logically, it is not so, but practically it seems to work admirably, with one exception, and that is the unblushing perjury Avkich takes place in these cases. I need say no more. The case is dismissed."