AN APPEAL DISMISSED

Evening Post, Volume XCV, Issue 45, 21 February 1918, Page 7

AN APPEAL DISMISSED

ROYAL OAK SHOUTING CASE.

Judgment was delivered by his Honour the Chief Justice (Sir Robert Stout) today in the appeal brought by James O'Hanlon, head barman at the Royal Oak Hotel, against his conviction by Mr. S. E. McCarthy, S.M., for a breach of the War Regulations prohibiting shouting. O'Hanlon was charged with E emitting shouting in tho bar in which c was serving, and the defence was one of mistaken identity. - It was alleged that the police had mistaken another barman, Badomski, for the defendant, it being asserted that the latter was not in the. bar at the time' the offence was supposed to have been committed. The police story was that O'Hanlcn had accepted a two-shilling piece from one man for two drinks, and gave in change Is 2d. . ■

In commenting on the evidence given on either side,. his Honour said it was wholly irreconcilable as regards time. *On tho question of identification his Honour said that no sensible person, after seeing Eadomski and O'Hanlon, could mistake one- for the other. He would prefer, to believe that there had been a mistake in time, rather than a mistake in identity. Eadomski had stated that he was. not the mar., who, received the 2s. "If I find that B-adomski was in the bar," snid liis Honour, " I will convict him of perjury." It could not be said that O'Haulon had discharged tho burden of proof placed upon him under the regulations. His Honour stated that he could not find that the Magistrate's decision was wrong unless the evidence clearly showed that it was so. The evidence certainly did not show that, and accordingly the appeal would bo dismissed, with £7 7s costs.

At tho appeal Mr. C. P. Skerrett, X.C.. and Mr. M. Myers appeared for appellant, and Mr, P. S. K. Macassey for the Crown.