HOSTILE WITNESS

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 141, 15 June 1923, Page 8

HOSTILE WITNESS

QUESTION OF SIGNED

STATEMENT

ALLEGED ILLEGAL SALE OF

LIQUOR

WORKING MEN'S CLUB

INVOLVED,

A somewhat unusual attitude was adopted by a witness for the prosecution Vj. a case heard by Mr. E. Page, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court to-day, when, during the course of his evidence in chief, he denied the truth of certain facts in a statement which he had made to the police, and had subsequently signed. The case was a prosecution under the Licensing Act, in which Hugh Douglas, manager of the Working Men's Club, was charged on three counts of selling liquor after hours. The case for the Crown was conducted by Sub-Inspector Cummings, and Mr. R. Kennedy appeared for the defendant. In opening the case, the Sub-Inspector said that on the evening of sth March, in company with Senior-Sergeant O'Hara, he visited the club, and in a small cardroom found three men, one of whom left just as the police arrived. The men had three bottles of liquor, two of ale and one of stout. Irlam was drinking stout, and had a quart bottle and a glass in front of him. The other man had a bottle of ale and the cork had just been drawn. Mam admitted straight'out that he had bought the liquor from one of the club's stewards, for Is 6d, but the other man said he did not know where the liquor canig from, as the man who left the room had procured it. The head steward of the club was called, and, in his presence, Irlam said that he had \ bought the liquor from one of the servants of the club, but when all the stewards were called, whether he was unable or did not want to identify the man, he did not do it. The police then went into the bar and found one of the lockers open, and this locker contained the same brand of liquor as that in the card-room. Called by the Sub-Inspector, Thomas Irlam, a carpenter of 50, Russell terrace, said that he was at the club on sth March last. He canie down from the billiardroom about 9.20 p.m., and after procuring a bottle of stout from one of tho members of the club, he went into the card-room. The sum of'ls 6d wai paid for the liquor. _Two other men had liquor, and witness was under the impression that they had procured it before 6 o'clock. A MISUNDERSTANDING?, j A statement which had been taken from the witness after the "raid" was then read, but in spite of the fact that he had signed it, irlam was reluctant about admitting the correctness of the statement. "I say that part of that statement is ujtorrect," maintained the witness Ihe Sub-Inspector: "Which part?" Witness; "I got the liquor from a member of the club, not a steward." "Have you seen him since?"—" Yes I think so." "Is that the only part of the statement that you object to?"—" Well, no " The Sub-Inspector: "Well, listen and J. will read it again. I read it slowly before, but listen carefully now." The Sub-Inspector (after reading the statement): "That is what you said that night?" Witness : "I suppose so. You have it down there, but it is a misunderstanding. Mr. Kennedy: "He doesn't seem to understand now I" The Sub-Inspector: "Oh, I know what is wrong with him. (To His Worship) : The witness is hcetile." "The witness is obviously hostile," commented tho Magistrate, and permitted the Sub-Inspector to cross-examine. "BEEN ON THE MAT." The Sub-Inspector (to the witness): "Why do you shift ground now?" Witness: "Because 1 have been in illhealth." "To use the popular phrase, you have 'been on the mat' before the executive of the club for this?"—" Yes. I suppose BO." "Has any influence been brought to bear upon you by anyone whatsoever in regard to you 'jeopardiisng' tha club's charter?"—" Not that I know of." Mr. Kennedy: "You suffer from «pilepsy, don't you?"—"I don't know what it is." "And you have fallen off buildings through this?"—" Yes, I have fallen off a scaffold." "You have been 'on the mat' with this club, long before this date?"—"l may have been. I don't remember." "Did the officials caution you?" "Yes." The Magistrate: "What for?" Witness: "Well, I suppose it was for bringing liquor into the club." "All the stewards of the club were brought before you after the police raid and you said that it was none of them who had served you?"—" Yes."' "Where did you sign the statement? At the club or at the police station?"— "I don't remember where it was." The Magistrate: "Who was the member'for whom you bought the liquor?" —"I don't know." "Where was he?"—"ln the passage:" "Do you usually buy liquor in the passage ?"—"No." "You met him in the passage and asked him if he had a bottle of stout?" —"Yes." "He handed the liquor to you?" "Yes, I suppose so." "Mr. Irlam, you understand the question.^ Did he hand you the bottle of stout?"—"l don't remember. It was so long ago." "Did you know the man at the time?" —"No." "He was a stranger?"—" Not exactly a stranger." . Evidence was also given by the Sub- ! Inspector himself, and this concluded the case for the prosecution. THE DEFENCE. The position, according to counsel for the defence, was that the officials of the club desired to observe all the law 3 in connection with the sale of liquor. It was for that reason that counsel intended to show the precautions they had taken. Only certain of the club's authorities had access to the bar, the president, the treasurer, the manager, the chief steward, and the night-porter. None but these persons could gain entry to the bar except by illegal means. The president on this occasion was at Taihape, en route to Auckland, the treasurer was at his home in Kilbirnie, the chief steward was on the premises, but had his key in bis possession, and was in tho billiard-room at the time that Irlam says he went downstairs and bought the liquor. The night-porter did not come im duly until after the police actually were in possession and each of the persons mentioned would testify that, (hey did not sell any liquor to Irlam on the night in question. "The man Irlam's testimony." wont on counsel, "was certainly given in n most extraordinary manner, and whan

could not identify the one whom, he stated, had sold liiin liquor." Several witnesses testified to counsel's statement, and at the conclusion of the case the Magistrate intimated^ that he would give his decision on Friday next. Decision accordingly was reserved.